Guest guest Posted December 9, 2005 Report Share Posted December 9, 2005 On Friday 09 December 2005 02:43 am, wrote: > Wow --Homemade lefse? --Is it NT? The recipes I have for lefse aren't of > the NT type, but maybe this too could be adapted. Mara, Oh, I doubt it was NT, but it was made by a fellow MVV shareholder from Wabasha, MN; I could pronounce all the ingredients' names and it tasted good. Better than the stuff you can buy in a store - even Lakewinds. My kids want me to learn how to make it now. We tried a couple years ago, when we were studying other cultures' holiday traditions in our homeschool co-op. We failed at making lefse - made good pancakes, but they weren't lefse. I was thinking that after I learn how to make them, I'd try them with sprouted flour; but I have to get 'brave' enough to try first. Oster, MN Isaiah 26:3 " I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. " --C. S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2005 Report Share Posted December 19, 2005 Sara, could I get your e-mail address so I can contact you offline about MVV milk? I couldn't find it on the group database, and you seem to be the closest person to me. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 I drink 1% milk. I would consider skim, but my husband hates it, so this is as " low " as I can go and still have him help me down the gallons. Leah S On 1/20/06, <stephy.miller@...> wrote: > > Does anyone else besides me drink 1% milk? I was making a ahke just > now, and I wondered how my drinking 1% instead of skim (yuck!!) alters > the carb/fat/protein contenet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 There's only about a 10 calorie and 1.5g of fat difference between skim and 1%. The protein and carbs are the same. I wouldn't sweat it. I drink 2% milk and eat 2% cottage cheese. Not only does it taste better, but dairy fat contains CLA. I've never really understood why people buy nonfat dairy products that taste like glue, and then go to the supplement store and buy the missing CLA in capsule form. On 1/20/06, <stephy.miller@...> wrote: > Does anyone else besides me drink 1% milk? I was making a ahke just > now, and I wondered how my drinking 1% instead of skim (yuck!!) alters > the carb/fat/protein contenet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 I drink soy milk. I find it has a lower sugar but higher fat content. It tastest better to me now. I don't know if it's psychological or what, but it's supposed to have fewer hormones. However, I tried that 8th continent brand with lower fat, and couldn't get used to it. I think it had the higher sugar content, though. I still cook with dry milk and will occasionally finish a glass my children don't drink. Marie in TX mommom31TX@... > > Does anyone else besides me drink 1% milk? I was making a ahke just > now, and I wondered how my drinking 1% instead of skim (yuck!!) alters > the carb/fat/protein contenet. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2006 Report Share Posted February 9, 2006 We can go round and round the mulberry bush on this raw milk thing. Again, perhaps the answer is to muscle test to see if the child's body wants it and can handle it. I know my own ears got clogged from kefir! That rarely happens but as one of my teachers keeps telling me, if you have one client that reacts to advice you give them, they'll tell l00 people. If you give them advice and the advice helps them, they tell no one. is Rotella, M.Ac., CNC > > >Original Message: > >From: " Kleiman " <liz2melody@...> > >Subject: raw milk vs.no milk > > >Hi-new to the forum -nutritionist and QX user. I would greatly > >appreciate opinions regarding the inclusion of raw milk products in > >the diet as per Dr.Mercola and peers vs. no milk raw/low fat or > >otherwise. I find this topic terribly contadictory and as much as I > >felt raw milk products were the way to go and far less allergenci and > >muscous forming I am no longer certain due to so much conflicting > >evidence.This query also extends to soy.I tend to advise against it > >but am still uncertain as to it's benefits in it's whole untainted > >form.I do wholeheartedly subscribe to the promotion of fermented soy > >products. > >My resources thus far have been www.notmilk.com vs. www.realmilk.com > >and www.mercola.com > >All experienced advice appreciated. > >This question is inspired by the previous thread regarding adipose > >tissue and 's views on cheese. > >Thanks in advance, > > > > Reply: > Hi , > As a Naturopath, I used to recommend raw milk to mom's who brought in > children with inner ear infections or ear aches. In most cases the > infections cleared > up and the ear aches went away. I think this was because of the natural > enzymes, > that are present in milk dealt effectively with the bacteria that was > infectious. > This lead me to believe that raw milk was a " good thing " . --- > initially....... > We are definitely conditioned via milk ads. When I asked a client why > she had her son > drink cow's milk, she said that everyone knew that milk was good for you. I > said, what if > human milk were available for her son - she said that was gross ----- is it? > That would be > the preferable milk. Pasteurized, homogonized, etc., milk and altered milk > I think is not good > for us. We are meant to eat whole foods, yet my vote now is NO for raw milk > for humans. > Now cheese is concentrated milk, higher in fat where toxins often reside, so > now I wonder > about that too. I am now eating only a little cheese, mostly from goat. > I think the not milk forums, etc. as well as the pro milk - mercola, all > might have some merit, > but both have diabolical opposite positions. So I think the answer is in > the middle. Possibly > moderation and substitute when at all possible. I don't advocate that > anyone should drink milk > past weaning. > My personal opinion is that life has to make sense. Milk has IGF-1 > hormones which make the > baby cow, goat grow. These hormones are powerful growth hormones and I > don't think they > are intended for us at all. Some say that growth hormones can make a cancer > worse - makes > sense, but I don't know. Animal babies do not drink milk past weaning. So > it seems that we > should not also. I know that not eating as much cheese, my breasts have > been less fibrous. > And singers do not drink milk due to its mucous creating problem. I think > if you are going > to drink milk it should be the raw milk of a smaller animal, ie goat, > although I am still > not in favor of it. Babies should be getting breast milk, and past weaning > no milk. There are > many fine nut milks you can make if you prefer milk on your cereal or it you > want to cook with it. > The store bought ones are high in sugar. > As far as soy is concerned, there are many research articles pro and > con. Regardless, most of > it is grown in the US and is GMO. Definitely a no no for me. I like the > raw soy beans in the Japanese > restaurants. Yet I no longer eat them due to GMO. I also do believe the > many research articles > relating to its thyroid inhibitors, enzyme inhibitors and the fact that it > does disable the main electrolytes, > calcium, potassium, etc. > When the soy craze began and my son-in-law turned vegetarian, I became > the gourmet of soy. Some > of it was great, others not so great. I gained weight. I read, researched > and now he doesn't eat soy - > his choice after reading too. They feed it to cows to fatten them up! My > Japanese friends laugh at > Americans. They say we are soy nuts. In Japan they eat the equivalent of > about 2 Tsp a day, when > they eat it, in a fish and animal broth, which destroys some of the bad > qualities of soy. Their soy > is not GMO. > Sorry this is so long, just food for thought. I am sure there will be > many who have their own > ideas as well. Good luck. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 11, 2006 Report Share Posted February 11, 2006 > > >Original Message: > >From: " Kleiman " <liz2melody@...> > >Subject: raw milk vs.no milk > > >Hi-new to the forum -nutritionist and QX user. I would greatly > >appreciate opinions regarding the inclusion of raw milk products in > >the diet as per Dr.Mercola and peers vs. no milk raw/low fat or > >otherwise. I find this topic terribly contadictory and as much as I > >felt raw milk products were the way to go and far less allergenci and > >muscous forming I am no longer certain due to so much conflicting > >evidence.This query also extends to soy.I tend to advise against it > >but am still uncertain as to it's benefits in it's whole untainted > >form.I do wholeheartedly subscribe to the promotion of fermented soy > >products. > >My resources thus far have been www.notmilk.com vs. www.realmilk.com > >and www.mercola.com > >All experienced advice appreciated. > >This question is inspired by the previous thread regarding adipose > >tissue and 's views on cheese. > >Thanks in advance, > > > > Reply: > Hi , > As a Naturopath, I used to recommend raw milk to mom's who brought in > children with inner ear infections or ear aches. In most cases the > infections cleared > up and the ear aches went away. I think this was because of the natural > enzymes, > that are present in milk dealt effectively with the bacteria that was > infectious. > This lead me to believe that raw milk was a " good thing " . --- > initially....... > We are definitely conditioned via milk ads. When I asked a client why > she had her son > drink cow's milk, she said that everyone knew that milk was good for you. I > said, what if > human milk were available for her son - she said that was gross --- -- is it? > That would be > the preferable milk. Pasteurized, homogonized, etc., milk and altered milk > I think is not good > for us. We are meant to eat whole foods, yet my vote now is NO for raw milk > for humans. > Now cheese is concentrated milk, higher in fat where toxins often reside, so > now I wonder > about that too. I am now eating only a little cheese, mostly from goat. > I think the not milk forums, etc. as well as the pro milk - mercola, all > might have some merit, > but both have diabolical opposite positions. So I think the answer is in > the middle. Possibly > moderation and substitute when at all possible. I don't advocate that > anyone should drink milk > past weaning. > My personal opinion is that life has to make sense. Milk has IGF-1 > hormones which make the > baby cow, goat grow. These hormones are powerful growth hormones and I > don't think they > are intended for us at all. Some say that growth hormones can make a cancer > worse - makes > sense, but I don't know. Animal babies do not drink milk past weaning. So > it seems that we > should not also. I know that not eating as much cheese, my breasts have > been less fibrous. > And singers do not drink milk due to its mucous creating problem. I think > if you are going > to drink milk it should be the raw milk of a smaller animal, ie goat, > although I am still > not in favor of it. Babies should be getting breast milk, and past weaning > no milk. There are > many fine nut milks you can make if you prefer milk on your cereal or it you > want to cook with it. > The store bought ones are high in sugar. > As far as soy is concerned, there are many research articles pro and > con. Regardless, most of > it is grown in the US and is GMO. Definitely a no no for me. I like the > raw soy beans in the Japanese > restaurants. Yet I no longer eat them due to GMO. I also do believe the > many research articles > relating to its thyroid inhibitors, enzyme inhibitors and the fact that it > does disable the main electrolytes, > calcium, potassium, etc. > When the soy craze began and my son-in-law turned vegetarian, I became > the gourmet of soy. Some > of it was great, others not so great. I gained weight. I read, researched > and now he doesn't eat soy - > his choice after reading too. They feed it to cows to fatten them up! My > Japanese friends laugh at > Americans. They say we are soy nuts. In Japan they eat the equivalent of > about 2 Tsp a day, when > they eat it, in a fish and animal broth, which destroys some of the bad > qualities of soy. Their soy > is not GMO. > Sorry this is so long, just food for thought. I am sure there will be > many who have their own > ideas as well. Good luck. > Hi , Your thoughts seem to be on par with mine and obviously flexible which I appreciate in our changing nutritional field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Alobar, Yes, you are correct. Eating foods that have had their natural fat removed is not healthy. Fat is necessary to digest protein. It is also necessary for the digestion and absorption of numerous nutrients. A lack of fat can lead to nutritional deficiencies. One of these deficiencies is osteoporosis. Because we need fat in the diet to help assimilate calcium. Eating low fat milk and dairy promotes osteoporosis! We think we are getting calcium in dairy, but if we eat low-fat dairy we are not absorbing the calcium. Maybe that is one of the reasons we gulp down tons of low fat dairy products and have high rates of osteoporosis in this country. In other countries that don't eat dairy, or very little (and always whole milk when they do) they have much lower rates of osteoporosis. Modern day milk has little resemblance to natural raw milk. I do not drink any milk unless it is organic and raw. Too many hormones and antibiotics, etc. in non-organic milk. But that's not the worst part. All the milk on a dairy is mixed into the same vat. If one cow has an infection ALL the milk is infected. Since big modern dairy farms have difficulty keeping cows clean and healthy (its almost impossible to be healthy cooped up in a cage and fed what amounts to garbage--refuge from various industries). It is impossible for a large modern dairy, run as they currently are, to not have infectious disease in the milk. Cows are milked even if their nipples are bleeding or oozing pus. Yes this happens all the time. This milk goes into the same vat as all the other milk. So all the milk become contaminated. To protect themselves dairy farmers have banded together and lobbied for the government to require pasteurization. This kills the germs, but also " kills " the milk and all the good bacteria in the milk. Many nutrients are destroyed. Pasteurization is a cheap solution to sloppy dairy practice. In the 1930s and 1940s Dr. Pottenger conducted a series of experiments using cats. He gave them raw milk or pasteurized milk. The cats getting nothing but raw milk were strong and healthy. The cats getting pasteurized milk became sickly and offspring were diseased--low immune function, high rates of infection, thyroid dysfunction, arthritis, overweight, osteoporosis, and numerous other degenerative diseases. None of the offspring of the second generation could produce a third generation. But that's not all. Milk is also fractionated and manipulated into a form that only resembles real milk. All fat is removed. The milk is then dehydrated. The powdered milk and fat are then recombined to produce non-fat, low-fat, and 2% milk--how else are they going to control the fat content so precisely? The milk is also homogenized which may cause other health problems. When you drink a glass of milk you are in no way drinking the beverage you grandparents enjoyed. You are consuming a product made in a factory that only tastes like milk. Even organic milk is processed in the same way, it just doesn't have all the pesticides and hormones. Organic cream would be far better because it sidesteps many of these stages, although it's likely to be pasteurized. I don't believe pasteurization makes the milk toxic necessarily, but it does destroy nutrients and makes it less nutritious. Cheese would also be better because it may also bypass some of these steps and during fermentation it is given new life, so to speak, from friendly bacteria. Bruce Re: Fat and Protein > Bruce, > > I know this is not what you said, but reading between the lines, > it seems to me that no fat or low fat milk is probably not a good idea > for us humans. > > Alobar > > > > On 2/13/06, Bruce Fife <bruce@...> wrote: > <snip> >> One of the things that is not mentioned in these " protein " studies is >> that >> since the casin is stripped of all other nutrients it is pure casin. >> Every >> particle of fat as well as other nutrients are removed. Casin and all >> other >> sources of protein REQUIRE fat for proper digestion and assimilation. In >> nature casin always comes with milkfat. All sources of protein come with >> a >> complimentary portion of fat. When fat is stripped from the protein, >> protein >> becomes difficult to digest and may cause any number of health >> problems--digestive problems?--lowered immunity?--increased susceptibly >> to >> cancer? >> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Hi Bruce, How about Garden of LIfe's Goatein? It is made from goats that are not fed pesitcides, growth hormones or antibiotics. Love, Pamela Bruce Fife <bruce@...> wrote: Alobar, Yes, you are correct. Eating foods that have had their natural fat removed is not healthy. Fat is necessary to digest protein. It is also necessary for the digestion and absorption of numerous nutrients. A lack of fat can lead to nutritional deficiencies. One of these deficiencies is osteoporosis. Because we need fat in the diet to help assimilate calcium. Eating low fat milk and dairy promotes osteoporosis! We think we are getting calcium in dairy, but if we eat low-fat dairy we are not absorbing the calcium. Maybe that is one of the reasons we gulp down tons of low fat dairy products and have high rates of osteoporosis in this country. In other countries that don't eat dairy, or very little (and always whole milk when they do) they have much lower rates of osteoporosis. Modern day milk has little resemblance to natural raw milk. I do not drink any milk unless it is organic and raw. Too many hormones and antibiotics, etc. in non-organic milk. But that's not the worst part. All the milk on a dairy is mixed into the same vat. If one cow has an infection ALL the milk is infected. Since big modern dairy farms have difficulty keeping cows clean and healthy (its almost impossible to be healthy cooped up in a cage and fed what amounts to garbage--refuge from various industries). It is impossible for a large modern dairy, run as they currently are, to not have infectious disease in the milk. Cows are milked even if their nipples are bleeding or oozing pus. Yes this happens all the time. This milk goes into the same vat as all the other milk. So all the milk become contaminated. To protect themselves dairy farmers have banded together and lobbied for the government to require pasteurization. This kills the germs, but also " kills " the milk and all the good bacteria in the milk. Many nutrients are destroyed. Pasteurization is a cheap solution to sloppy dairy practice. In the 1930s and 1940s Dr. Pottenger conducted a series of experiments using cats. He gave them raw milk or pasteurized milk. The cats getting nothing but raw milk were strong and healthy. The cats getting pasteurized milk became sickly and offspring were diseased--low immune function, high rates of infection, thyroid dysfunction, arthritis, overweight, osteoporosis, and numerous other degenerative diseases. None of the offspring of the second generation could produce a third generation. But that's not all. Milk is also fractionated and manipulated into a form that only resembles real milk. All fat is removed. The milk is then dehydrated. The powdered milk and fat are then recombined to produce non-fat, low-fat, and 2% milk--how else are they going to control the fat content so precisely? The milk is also homogenized which may cause other health problems. When you drink a glass of milk you are in no way drinking the beverage you grandparents enjoyed. You are consuming a product made in a factory that only tastes like milk. Even organic milk is processed in the same way, it just doesn't have all the pesticides and hormones. Organic cream would be far better because it sidesteps many of these stages, although it's likely to be pasteurized. I don't believe pasteurization makes the milk toxic necessarily, but it does destroy nutrients and makes it less nutritious. Cheese would also be better because it may also bypass some of these steps and during fermentation it is given new life, so to speak, from friendly bacteria. Bruce --------------------------------- Brings words and photos together (easily) with PhotoMail - it's free and works with . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Pamela, I would never consume any product that contains powdered whole milk, regardless of where it comes from--cow, goat, or whatever. Powdered whole milk contains oxidized unsaturated fats. Oxidized fats are known to damaged artery walls and promote plaque buildup. Bruce Re: milk > Hi Bruce, > > How about Garden of LIfe's Goatein? > It is made from goats that are not fed pesitcides, growth hormones or > antibiotics. > > Love, > Pamela > > Bruce Fife <bruce@...> wrote: Alobar, > > Yes, you are correct. Eating foods that have had their natural fat > removed > is not healthy. Fat is necessary to digest protein. It is also necessary > for > the digestion and absorption of numerous nutrients. A lack of fat can > lead > to nutritional deficiencies. One of these deficiencies is osteoporosis. > Because we need fat in the diet to help assimilate calcium. Eating low > fat > milk and dairy promotes osteoporosis! We think we are getting calcium in > dairy, but if we eat low-fat dairy we are not absorbing the calcium. > Maybe > that is one of the reasons we gulp down tons of low fat dairy products > and > have high rates of osteoporosis in this country. In other countries that > don't eat dairy, or very little (and always whole milk when they do) they > have much lower rates of osteoporosis. > > Modern day milk has little resemblance to natural raw milk. I do not > drink > any milk unless it is organic and raw. Too many hormones and antibiotics, > etc. in non-organic milk. But that's not the worst part. All the milk on > a > dairy is mixed into the same vat. If one cow has an infection ALL the > milk > is infected. Since big modern dairy farms have difficulty keeping cows > clean > and healthy (its almost impossible to be healthy cooped up in a cage and > fed > what amounts to garbage--refuge from various industries). It is > impossible > for a large modern dairy, run as they currently are, to not have > infectious > disease in the milk. Cows are milked even if their nipples are bleeding > or > oozing pus. Yes this happens all the time. This milk goes into the same > vat > as all the other milk. So all the milk become contaminated. To protect > themselves dairy farmers have banded together and lobbied for the > government > to require pasteurization. This kills the germs, but also " kills " the > milk > and all the good bacteria in the milk. Many nutrients are destroyed. > Pasteurization is a cheap solution to sloppy dairy practice. > > In the 1930s and 1940s Dr. Pottenger conducted a series of experiments > using > cats. He gave them raw milk or pasteurized milk. The cats getting nothing > but raw milk were strong and healthy. The cats getting pasteurized milk > became sickly and offspring were diseased--low immune function, high > rates > of infection, thyroid dysfunction, arthritis, overweight, osteoporosis, > and > numerous other degenerative diseases. None of the offspring of the second > generation could produce a third generation. > > But that's not all. Milk is also fractionated and manipulated into a form > that only resembles real milk. All fat is removed. The milk is then > dehydrated. The powdered milk and fat are then recombined to produce > non-fat, low-fat, and 2% milk--how else are they going to control the fat > content so precisely? The milk is also homogenized which may cause other > health problems. > > When you drink a glass of milk you are in no way drinking the beverage > you > grandparents enjoyed. You are consuming a product made in a factory that > only tastes like milk. Even organic milk is processed in the same way, it > just doesn't have all the pesticides and hormones. > > Organic cream would be far better because it sidesteps many of these > stages, > although it's likely to be pasteurized. I don't believe pasteurization > makes > the milk toxic necessarily, but it does destroy nutrients and makes it > less > nutritious. > Cheese would also be better because it may also bypass some of these > steps > and during fermentation it is given new life, so to speak, from friendly > bacteria. > > Bruce > > > > > --------------------------------- > Brings words and photos together (easily) with > PhotoMail - it's free and works with . > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2006 Report Share Posted February 14, 2006 Lagoon, I'm leery of all processed powdered products. To powder something it needs to be changed a great deal from its original form. I'm of the opinion that foods are healthiest in their most natural form and the more processing they incur the less nutritious they become. So I prefer foods with the least amount of processing. Bruce Re: milk > > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > How about Garden of LIfe's Goatein? > > It is made from goats that are not fed pesitcides, growth hormones or > > antibiotics. > > > > Love, > > Pamela > > > > Bruce Fife <bruce@...> wrote: Alobar, > > > > Yes, you are correct. Eating foods that have had their natural fat > > removed > > is not healthy. Fat is necessary to digest protein. It is also > necessary > > for > > the digestion and absorption of numerous nutrients. A lack of fat can > > lead > > to nutritional deficiencies. One of these deficiencies is > osteoporosis. > > Because we need fat in the diet to help assimilate calcium. Eating low > > fat > > milk and dairy promotes osteoporosis! We think we are getting calcium > in > > dairy, but if we eat low-fat dairy we are not absorbing the calcium. > > Maybe > > that is one of the reasons we gulp down tons of low fat dairy products > > and > > have high rates of osteoporosis in this country. In other countries > that > > don't eat dairy, or very little (and always whole milk when they do) > they > > have much lower rates of osteoporosis. > > > > Modern day milk has little resemblance to natural raw milk. I do not > > drink > > any milk unless it is organic and raw. Too many hormones and > antibiotics, > > etc. in non-organic milk. But that's not the worst part. All the milk > on > > a > > dairy is mixed into the same vat. If one cow has an infection ALL the > > milk > > is infected. Since big modern dairy farms have difficulty keeping cows > > clean > > and healthy (its almost impossible to be healthy cooped up in a cage > and > > fed > > what amounts to garbage--refuge from various industries). It is > > impossible > > for a large modern dairy, run as they currently are, to not have > > infectious > > disease in the milk. Cows are milked even if their nipples are > bleeding > > or > > oozing pus. Yes this happens all the time. This milk goes into the > same > > vat > > as all the other milk. So all the milk become contaminated. To protect > > themselves dairy farmers have banded together and lobbied for the > > government > > to require pasteurization. This kills the germs, but also " kills " the > > milk > > and all the good bacteria in the milk. Many nutrients are destroyed. > > Pasteurization is a cheap solution to sloppy dairy practice. > > > > In the 1930s and 1940s Dr. Pottenger conducted a series of experiments > > using > > cats. He gave them raw milk or pasteurized milk. The cats getting > nothing > > but raw milk were strong and healthy. The cats getting pasteurized > milk > > became sickly and offspring were diseased--low immune function, high > > rates > > of infection, thyroid dysfunction, arthritis, overweight, > osteoporosis, > > and > > numerous other degenerative diseases. None of the offspring of the > second > > generation could produce a third generation. > > > > But that's not all. Milk is also fractionated and manipulated into a > form > > that only resembles real milk. All fat is removed. The milk is then > > dehydrated. The powdered milk and fat are then recombined to produce > > non-fat, low-fat, and 2% milk--how else are they going to control the > fat > > content so precisely? The milk is also homogenized which may cause > other > > health problems. > > > > When you drink a glass of milk you are in no way drinking the beverage > > you > > grandparents enjoyed. You are consuming a product made in a factory > that > > only tastes like milk. Even organic milk is processed in the same way, > it > > just doesn't have all the pesticides and hormones. > > > > Organic cream would be far better because it sidesteps many of these > > stages, > > although it's likely to be pasteurized. I don't believe pasteurization > > makes > > the milk toxic necessarily, but it does destroy nutrients and makes it > > less > > nutritious. > > Cheese would also be better because it may also bypass some of these > > steps > > and during fermentation it is given new life, so to speak, from > friendly > > bacteria. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Brings words and photos together (easily) with > > PhotoMail - it's free and works with . > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2006 Report Share Posted February 14, 2006 Bruce, What is your opinion of Carnation fat free skim milk? I did give up all other milk a few years ago and solved a daily digestion problem. but i do use the Carnation in my smoothie every day. Lagooon Re: milk > Hi Bruce, > > How about Garden of LIfe's Goatein? > It is made from goats that are not fed pesitcides, growth hormones or > antibiotics. > > Love, > Pamela > > Bruce Fife <bruce@...> wrote: Alobar, > > Yes, you are correct. Eating foods that have had their natural fat > removed > is not healthy. Fat is necessary to digest protein. It is also necessary > for > the digestion and absorption of numerous nutrients. A lack of fat can > lead > to nutritional deficiencies. One of these deficiencies is osteoporosis. > Because we need fat in the diet to help assimilate calcium. Eating low > fat > milk and dairy promotes osteoporosis! We think we are getting calcium in > dairy, but if we eat low-fat dairy we are not absorbing the calcium. > Maybe > that is one of the reasons we gulp down tons of low fat dairy products > and > have high rates of osteoporosis in this country. In other countries that > don't eat dairy, or very little (and always whole milk when they do) they > have much lower rates of osteoporosis. > > Modern day milk has little resemblance to natural raw milk. I do not > drink > any milk unless it is organic and raw. Too many hormones and antibiotics, > etc. in non-organic milk. But that's not the worst part. All the milk on > a > dairy is mixed into the same vat. If one cow has an infection ALL the > milk > is infected. Since big modern dairy farms have difficulty keeping cows > clean > and healthy (its almost impossible to be healthy cooped up in a cage and > fed > what amounts to garbage--refuge from various industries). It is > impossible > for a large modern dairy, run as they currently are, to not have > infectious > disease in the milk. Cows are milked even if their nipples are bleeding > or > oozing pus. Yes this happens all the time. This milk goes into the same > vat > as all the other milk. So all the milk become contaminated. To protect > themselves dairy farmers have banded together and lobbied for the > government > to require pasteurization. This kills the germs, but also " kills " the > milk > and all the good bacteria in the milk. Many nutrients are destroyed. > Pasteurization is a cheap solution to sloppy dairy practice. > > In the 1930s and 1940s Dr. Pottenger conducted a series of experiments > using > cats. He gave them raw milk or pasteurized milk. The cats getting nothing > but raw milk were strong and healthy. The cats getting pasteurized milk > became sickly and offspring were diseased--low immune function, high > rates > of infection, thyroid dysfunction, arthritis, overweight, osteoporosis, > and > numerous other degenerative diseases. None of the offspring of the second > generation could produce a third generation. > > But that's not all. Milk is also fractionated and manipulated into a form > that only resembles real milk. All fat is removed. The milk is then > dehydrated. The powdered milk and fat are then recombined to produce > non-fat, low-fat, and 2% milk--how else are they going to control the fat > content so precisely? The milk is also homogenized which may cause other > health problems. > > When you drink a glass of milk you are in no way drinking the beverage > you > grandparents enjoyed. You are consuming a product made in a factory that > only tastes like milk. Even organic milk is processed in the same way, it > just doesn't have all the pesticides and hormones. > > Organic cream would be far better because it sidesteps many of these > stages, > although it's likely to be pasteurized. I don't believe pasteurization > makes > the milk toxic necessarily, but it does destroy nutrients and makes it > less > nutritious. > Cheese would also be better because it may also bypass some of these > steps > and during fermentation it is given new life, so to speak, from friendly > bacteria. > > Bruce > > > > > --------------------------------- > Brings words and photos together (easily) with > PhotoMail - it's free and works with . > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 As for soya, Stirling, the founder of BioCare (one of the best supplement companies in the U.K.), says that humans have not the right lactic bacteria to digest soya. BioCare sells Isoflavone Complex, which is fermented soya, to provide the beneficial isoflavones genestein, diedzin, and glycetein, which have been shown to benefit us in many ways, as well as phyto-oestrogens (to stabilise oestrogen levels). As with any kinds of foods, good or bad, anything in excess is bad. We are meant to eat a great variety of natural, wholesome foods, preferably organic - 32 different kinds in a day - to get all the nutrients we require. So eating too much of one thing, quantity vs. variety, is going to exclude lots of the essential nutrients. Be well, Azizah Kleiman wrote: > > >Original Message: > >From: " Kleiman" <liz2melody@...> > >Subject: raw milk vs.no milk > > >Hi-new to the forum -nutritionist and QX user. I would greatly > >appreciate opinions regarding the inclusion of raw milk products in > >the diet as per Dr.Mercola and peers vs. no milk raw/low fat or > >otherwise. I find this topic terribly contadictory and as much as I > >felt raw milk products were the way to go and far less allergenci and > >muscous forming I am no longer certain due to so much conflicting > >evidence.This query also extends to soy.I tend to advise against it > >but am still uncertain as to it's benefits in it's whole untainted > >form.I do wholeheartedly subscribe to the promotion of fermented soy > >products. > >My resources thus far have been www.notmilk.com vs. www.realmilk.com > >and www.mercola.com > >All experienced advice appreciated. > >This question is inspired by the previous thread regarding adipose > >tissue and 's views on cheese. > >Thanks in advance, > > > > Reply: > Hi , > As a Naturopath, I used to recommend raw milk to mom's who brought in > children with inner ear infections or ear aches. In most cases the > infections cleared > up and the ear aches went away. I think this was because of the natural > enzymes, > that are present in milk dealt effectively with the bacteria that was > infectious. > This lead me to believe that raw milk was a "good thing". --- > initially....... > We are definitely conditioned via milk ads. When I asked a client why > she had her son > drink cow's milk, she said that everyone knew that milk was good for you. I > said, what if > human milk were available for her son - she said that was gross --- -- is it? > That would be > the preferable milk. Pasteurized, homogonized, etc., milk and altered milk > I think is not good > for us. We are meant to eat whole foods, yet my vote now is NO for raw milk > for humans. > Now cheese is concentrated milk, higher in fat where toxins often reside, so > now I wonder > about that too. I am now eating only a little cheese, mostly from goat. > I think the not milk forums, etc. as well as the pro milk - mercola, all > might have some merit, > but both have diabolical opposite positions. So I think the answer is in > the middle. Possibly > moderation and substitute when at all possible. I don't advocate that > anyone should drink milk > past weaning. > My personal opinion is that life has to make sense. Milk has IGF-1 > hormones which make the > baby cow, goat grow. These hormones are powerful growth hormones and I > don't think they > are intended for us at all. Some say that growth hormones can make a cancer > worse - makes > sense, but I don't know. Animal babies do not drink milk past weaning. So > it seems that we > should not also. I know that not eating as much cheese, my breasts have > been less fibrous. > And singers do not drink milk due to its mucous creating problem. I think > if you are going > to drink milk it should be the raw milk of a smaller animal, ie goat, > although I am still > not in favor of it. Babies should be getting breast milk, and past weaning > no milk. There are > many fine nut milks you can make if you prefer milk on your cereal or it you > want to cook with it. > The store bought ones are high in sugar. > As far as soy is concerned, there are many research articles pro and > con. Regardless, most of > it is grown in the US and is GMO. Definitely a no no for me. I like the > raw soy beans in the Japanese > restaurants. Yet I no longer eat them due to GMO. I also do believe the > many research articles > relating to its thyroid inhibitors, enzyme inhibitors and the fact that it > does disable the main electrolytes, > calcium, potassium, etc. > When the soy craze began and my son-in-law turned vegetarian, I became > the gourmet of soy. Some > of it was great, others not so great. I gained weight. I read, researched > and now he doesn't eat soy - > his choice after reading too. They feed it to cows to fatten them up! My > Japanese friends laugh at > Americans. They say we are soy nuts. In Japan they eat the equivalent of > about 2 Tsp a day, when > they eat it, in a fish and animal broth, which destroys some of the bad > qualities of soy. Their soy > is not GMO. > Sorry this is so long, just food for thought. I am sure there will be > many who have their own > ideas as well. Good luck. > Hi , Your thoughts seem to be on par with mine and obviously flexible which I appreciate in our changing nutritional field. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/257 - Release Date: 10/02/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 How about sesame seeds? On Feb 15, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Ross Craig wrote: > thank you..ok, now to find a better way to get more calcium... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 Re: milk How about sesame seeds? On Feb 15, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Ross Craig wrote: > thank you..ok, now to find a better way to get more calcium... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 thank you..ok, now to find a better way to get more calcium... Re: milk > Bruce, > > What is your opinion of Carnation fat free skim milk? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 Craig, Its not always easyto find. You may have rto travel to get it. Its likely to cost more. ButYou can get raw milk.It tastes sooo much better and is healthier for you. I live in NC. Its illegal to sell it in NC except for pet use. SC has raw certified dairys. So we go to the dairys to get our milk.It is worth it! IN NC Ross Craig <lagoon@...> wrote: thank you..ok, now to find a better way to get more calcium... Re: milk > Bruce, > > What is your opinion of Carnation fat free skim milk? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 Purchasing raw milk in Texas also has shades of grey in legality. In my area are cow-share programs and we do have some goat dairies. I purchase my raw cow's milk bootleg (sad what we're reduced to in order to obtain nutritious foods) from a farmer with 4 cows. It's great tasting milk, useful even when it gets older and soured, and many people who have problems with the store-bought, tinkered-with milk can drink raw milk with no ill effects. Maybe this can help you locate some in your area: http://www.realmilk.com/ If not, try asking around local feed stores. -Patty > > Craig, Its not always easyto find. You may have rto travel to get it. Its likely to cost more. ButYou can get raw milk.It tastes sooo much better and is healthier for you. > > I live in NC. Its illegal to sell it in NC except for pet use. SC has raw certified dairys. So we go to the dairys to get our milk.It is worth it! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 Although if is sensitive to milk and dairy products per se, then he should avoid them. Sue finds her general sensitivities are worsened by any kind of dairy produce - organic source or not. Sometimes these effects seem to develop later in life or be concealed. Ian _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of McAfee Sent: 02 October 2006 12:46 Subject: milk I too agree that no one should drink pasteurized milk. It is poison. The bad bacteria, hormones, antibiotics, etc. cause numerous illnesses. On the other hand, organic RAW milk has been proven to cure asthma and host of other diseases. http://www.mercola. <http://www.mercola.com/2003/mar/26/pasteurized_milk.htm> com/2003/mar/26/pasteurized_milk.htm http://www.realmilk <http://www.realmilk.com/> .com/ On Oct 2, 2006, at 4:21 AM, paulpjcaol (DOT) <mailto:paulpjc%40aol.com> com wrote: > I have given up milk for nearly 1.5 months, could be coincidence but > notice > that I am less sensitive at the moment, of course I am also doing the > avoidance measures so this will gradually improve matters, That said > if I spend to > long under fluorescent lights I still get red sore spots/lesions on my > scalp > and temples. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 > Although if is sensitive to milk and dairy products per se, then he > should avoid them. Sue finds her general sensitivities are worsened by > any kind of dairy produce - organic source or not. It seems that merely being " organic " is not good enough with dairy products. " Grass fed " seems to be critical, as does " raw " . I get bad reactions to commercial dairy products. Also organic pasturized dairy products. But I do just fine on the raw, grass-fed, organic dairy products that I have shipped to me from California. But I still have to treat this as a " supplement " , and watch my " dosage " -- typically 5-8 ounces per day works the best, as I tend to suffer from a lack of oxygen if I go beyond that (I get that symptom with a lot of fatty acid supplements) Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 Hi Marc: Yes, many people seem to react badly to heated (i.e., pasteurized) milk and dairy products, but a number of folks -- myself included -- do well with raw milk and related dairy products, particularly if it is from largely-pasture-fed (aka " grass-fed " ) cows. However, and this seems to be largely dependent upon genetics, many people do not do well on even raw dairy; this is likely because the practice of ingesting milk in significant quantities only entered the chronological timeline of human evolution relatively recently, in perhaps the past 10,000 years or less, and thus there has been insufficient time for the gene pool to fully catch up in adapting to utilizing this food properly. Interestingly, I useta alwasy react badly to pasturized dairy, but now that I regularly ingest EM (beneficial microbes which produce antioxidants and other energy substances), my body can tolerate modes amounts of pasteurized dairy just fine. with care, --Vinny At 12:56 PM 10/2/2006, you wrote: > > Although if is sensitive to milk and dairy products per se, then he > > should avoid them. Sue finds her general sensitivities are worsened by > > any kind of dairy produce - organic source or not. > >It seems that merely being " organic " is not good enough >with dairy products. " Grass fed " seems to be critical, >as does " raw " . > >I get bad reactions to commercial dairy products. Also >organic pasturized dairy products. But I do just fine >on the raw, grass-fed, organic dairy products that I have >shipped to me from California. But I still have to >treat this as a " supplement " , and watch my " dosage " -- >typically 5-8 ounces per day works the best, as I >tend to suffer from a lack of oxygen if I go beyond >that (I get that symptom with a lot of fatty acid >supplements) > >Marc > Vinny Pinto vinny@... phone 301-694-1249 To see my informational websites and e-mail list groups, please go to: http://www.vinnypinto.us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2006 Report Share Posted October 2, 2006 I can understand if a person is not made for milk product ingestion. In most cases I have found the person has not had truly raw AND organic milk products but rather regular pasteurized milk products from a disease ridden factory farm. No wonder people are told to stay off milk products with all the crap that is in non-organic milk products. my 2 cents, On Oct 2, 2006, at 10:57 AM, Ian Kemp wrote: > Although if is sensitive to milk and dairy products per se, then > he > should avoid them. Sue finds her general sensitivities are worsened > by any > kind of dairy produce - organic source or not. Sometimes these > effects seem > to develop later in life or be concealed. > Ian > > _____ > > From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of > McAfee > Sent: 02 October 2006 12:46 > > Subject: milk > > > > I too agree that no one should drink pasteurized milk. It is poison. > The bad bacteria, hormones, antibiotics, etc. cause numerous illnesses. > On the other hand, organic RAW milk has been proven to cure asthma and > host of other diseases. > http://www.mercola. > <http://www.mercola.com/2003/mar/26/pasteurized_milk.htm> > com/2003/mar/26/pasteurized_milk.htm > http://www.realmilk <http://www.realmilk.com/> .com/ > > > On Oct 2, 2006, at 4:21 AM, paulpjcaol (DOT) <mailto:paulpjc%40aol.com> com > wrote: > >> I have given up milk for nearly 1.5 months, could be coincidence but >> notice >> that I am less sensitive at the moment, of course I am also doing the >> avoidance measures so this will gradually improve matters, That said >> if I spend to >> long under fluorescent lights I still get red sore spots/lesions on my >> scalp >> and temples. >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2007 Report Share Posted March 5, 2007 Have you tried putting " barium " in the search box and clicking " enter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Don, Try these links. HTH, Randi http://www.fedupwithfoodadditives.info/factsheets/FactA2milk.htm http://www.a2corporation.com/index.php/ps_pagename/faqs > > Will what is the difference in A-1 milk and A-2? > > Don Prohaska > BuckSnort s (http://BuckSnorts.tripod.com) > BuckSnort Nutrition (http://BuckSnortNutrition.tripod.com) > Stable Pros (http://StablePros.tripod.com) > New Email: bucksnort@... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 You have to buy it from a farm. There should be some information in the database. Otherwise Prairie Wind Farms sells it, they have a monthly order that gets delivered the 2nd Tuesday of the month in Brooklyn Park or Edina. There is another where you can get it weekly, the drop site is in Brooklyn Park. From what I've been told, Prairie Wind is grassfed all year, the other is supplemented with grains in the winter. Hope that helps, and I can get you the information for these if you're interested, or if someone else hasn't beat me to it. ~Virginia _________________________________________________________________ Exercise your brain! Try Flexicon. http://games.msn.com/en/flexicon/default.htm?icid=flexicon_hmemailtaglinemarch07 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.