Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: 'Milk'

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

I use both soymilk (light soy - meaning lower fat content - and unsweetened at

around 70 cals per 8 oz cup depending on the brand; and I use almond milk - the

'lighter' kind at 40 cal per cup. Both make an excellent substitute for milk in

recipes calling for it. All are good with cereals, and I like both almond milk

and soymilk for use in hot milk drinks. I have bought and enjoyed rice milk

also, but cannot find it in lower calories than 120 per cup so therefore forego

it.

Does this help at all? You can write to me privately if you wish at

drpatsant@...

Best, Pat

>

> Hi folks:

>

> For a while I have been trying, and to a limited extent experimenting with,

different substitutes for milk.

>

> Years ago I used to drink large amounts of regular skim milk. But I found two

problems. First, it made me feel tired (and babies usually fall asleep after

drinking milk, so it may not be a coincidence.) Second, there have been a

couple of studies which found an association between milk consumption and

advanced prostate cancer. One was done in Italy, and the other, IIRC, was a

finding of the Physicians Health Study. They were posted here some time ago.

>

> There are quite a few non-animal sources of 'milk'. I am aware of products

made from soybeans, almonds, rice and oats. Perhaps there are others I am not

aware of.

>

> The calorie counts - per 250 ml cup - of these are as follows:

>

> From regular cow's milk: skim 90 kcal; 1% 110; 2% 130; homogenised 160.

>

> The soy milks I have seen contain anywhere between 70 and 110 calories.

>

> Rice milk, between 110 and 130.

>

> Almond milk, between 40 and 130.

>

> The only oat milk I have encountered contained 120 calories per cup.

>

> Most of these products contain sugar. Not a big surprise as cow's milk also

contains sugar. But the almond milk that had only 40 calories per cup was

labeled as " Unsweetened " . Many seem to be trying to disguise the sugar content

by describing it as something else. 'Evaporated Cane Juice' comes to mind in

more than one case.

>

> If anyone has used these products and has something interesting about them to

share with us, please post. In particular it would be interesting to know if

anyone has found any of them to be a good replacement for milk in recipes that

call for it.

>

> I have tried all of them except soy milk, and have found they are an excellent

substitute for eating with things like rolled oats.

>

> Rodney.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodney,

Some natural foods may pose health problems, but in my opinion, artificial foods

are probably worse. I trust dumb cows more than the smart chemists who concoct

imitation foods for the purpose of increasing corporate profits.

Industrial laboratories have given us really bad " foods " such as hydrogenated

fats with trans-fatty acids and high-fructose corn syrup. I always suspect that

artificial and imitation foods are inferior to the natural foods that they try

to copy. For this reason, I never use rice milk, soy milk, or other artificial

foods.

About a year ago, I wrote a blog entry about a " milk " product that really irked

me:

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/blogentries/watered-down-milk-in-the-dairy-sect\

ion.html

Tony

>

> Hi folks:

>

> For a while I have been trying, and to a limited extent experimenting with,

different substitutes for milk.

>

> Years ago I used to drink large amounts of regular skim milk. But I found two

problems. First, it made me feel tired (and babies usually fall asleep after

drinking milk, so it may not be a coincidence.) Second, there have been a

couple of studies which found an association between milk consumption and

advanced prostate cancer. One was done in Italy, and the other, IIRC, was a

finding of the Physicians Health Study. They were posted here some time ago.

>

> There are quite a few non-animal sources of 'milk'. I am aware of products

made from soybeans, almonds, rice and oats. Perhaps there are others I am not

aware of.

>

> The calorie counts - per 250 ml cup - of these are as follows:

>

> From regular cow's milk: skim 90 kcal; 1% 110; 2% 130; homogenised 160.

>

> The soy milks I have seen contain anywhere between 70 and 110 calories.

>

> Rice milk, between 110 and 130.

>

> Almond milk, between 40 and 130.

>

> The only oat milk I have encountered contained 120 calories per cup.

>

> Most of these products contain sugar. Not a big surprise as cow's milk also

contains sugar. But the almond milk that had only 40 calories per cup was

labeled as " Unsweetened " . Many seem to be trying to disguise the sugar content

by describing it as something else. 'Evaporated Cane Juice' comes to mind in

more than one case.

>

> If anyone has used these products and has something interesting about them to

share with us, please post. In particular it would be interesting to know if

anyone has found any of them to be a good replacement for milk in recipes that

call for it.

>

> I have tried all of them except soy milk, and have found they are an excellent

substitute for eating with things like rolled oats.

>

> Rodney.

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony, Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A large number of

the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.Best, Pat---"If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton, you may as well make it dance." Bernard Shaw"Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." Wilde.

Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shy away from making any "foods" at home - just a fear I have of contamination.

I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about calling it what it IS.

What is it - an extract?

Regards

[ ] Re: 'Milk'

Tony, Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.Best, Pat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tony:

Interesting post about artificial foods.

I have a question: would you object to a 'processed' food containing several

ingredients each of which you would classify as 'generally healthy if consumed

on its own'?

If you would object, what would be your reason? Do you believe that mixing

together healthy foods can somehow make the mixture unhealthy? And if you do

believe that, can I assume you never eat a meal/recipe containing more than one

ingredient? And if you do cook/eat multiple ingredient recipes, how does that

differ from a food processing company 'cooking' up a recipe from generally

healthy ingredients?

Your post seemed to imply that you *would* object to a processed food made from

healthy ingredients. But perhaps I misread it?

Thanks.

> >

> > Hi folks:

> >

> > For a while I have been trying, and to a limited extent experimenting with,

different substitutes for milk.

> >

> > Years ago I used to drink large amounts of regular skim milk. But I found

two problems. First, it made me feel tired (and babies usually fall asleep

after drinking milk, so it may not be a coincidence.) Second, there have been a

couple of studies which found an association between milk consumption and

advanced prostate cancer. One was done in Italy, and the other, IIRC, was a

finding of the Physicians Health Study. They were posted here some time ago.

> >

> > There are quite a few non-animal sources of 'milk'. I am aware of products

made from soybeans, almonds, rice and oats. Perhaps there are others I am not

aware of.

> >

> > The calorie counts - per 250 ml cup - of these are as follows:

> >

> > From regular cow's milk: skim 90 kcal; 1% 110; 2% 130; homogenised 160.

> >

> > The soy milks I have seen contain anywhere between 70 and 110 calories.

> >

> > Rice milk, between 110 and 130.

> >

> > Almond milk, between 40 and 130.

> >

> > The only oat milk I have encountered contained 120 calories per cup.

> >

> > Most of these products contain sugar. Not a big surprise as cow's milk also

contains sugar. But the almond milk that had only 40 calories per cup was

labeled as " Unsweetened " . Many seem to be trying to disguise the sugar content

by describing it as something else. 'Evaporated Cane Juice' comes to mind in

more than one case.

> >

> > If anyone has used these products and has something interesting about them

to share with us, please post. In particular it would be interesting to know if

anyone has found any of them to be a good replacement for milk in recipes that

call for it.

> >

> > I have tried all of them except soy milk, and have found they are an

excellent substitute for eating with things like rolled oats.

> >

> > Rodney.

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JW:

You raise an interesting point. I would, however, think that if health is a

consideration and that if the possibility of contamination is a concern, then

home-cooked/prepared foods would be generally safer than those obtained from

elsewhere. In any case, one must prepare some foods at home, surely, not relying

solely on take-out foods and restaurants? The suggestion, if that's what it is,

that food cooked at home 'from scratch' is somehow less healthy than food

obtained from restaurants and supermarkets is mystifying to me. (Otoh, I am not

suggesting that there is necessarily a correlation between home-cooked food and

superior nutrional/health value - there are excellent processed foods on the

market, despite the popular turn against them among some segments of society

currently.)

I do, as it happens, prefer to cook 'from scratch' - but that's a matter of my

personal taste. It also lets me be sure exactly what ingredients are in each

portion and know the nutritional and caloric value - not always immediately

apparent from the information on the sides of packages despite what is

supposedly intended.

Best, Pat

>

> I shy away from making any " foods " at home - just a fear I have of

contamination.

> I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about calling it

what it IS.

> What is it - an extract?

>

> Regards

>

> [ ] Re: 'Milk'

>

>

>

>

> Tony,

> Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of

non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives

and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the

non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside

what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and

ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not

yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best

made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not

have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)

>

> Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A

large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows

some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an

alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable

version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.

>

> Best, Pat

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi JW:

Well to answer for myself: I want to avoid animal milk for reasons we have

discussed here previously - while it is great for babies it may not be healthy,

especially for older males. But milk is a useful product. It goes well with

some things (cereals have been mentioned) and can be very useful in recipes.

For example, in making sauces which can make foods many of us here believe are

desirable to eat quite tasty.

So I would like something I believe to be composed of healthy ingredients, which

I can use in place of regular milk, for these other purposes. I am a little

suspicious of soybeans, so oats, almonds or rice seem like great alternatives,

if they work well for what I want them for (do the sauces turn out the way I

would like them to be?).

Input based on other people's experiences with these other substitute milk

products would be helpful to me. Which is why I posted about it. Hope the

above clarifies this at least somewhat.

Rodney.

> >

> > I shy away from making any " foods " at home - just a fear I have of

contamination.

> > I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about calling

it what it IS.

> > What is it - an extract?

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > [ ] Re: 'Milk'

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Tony,

> > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of

non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives

and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the

non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside

what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and

ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not

yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best

made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not

have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)

> >

> > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A

large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows

some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an

alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable

version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.

> >

> > Best, Pat

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________

>

> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

> http://www.eset.com

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is - what is the soy white stuff? How is it made? Is it always the same? Is it made here or shipped from the Orient? Are the amino acids always the same, and are they the same as milk?

Lotsa questions.

If I want soy why not just put some soy protein isolate (a well documented product) in juice or something?

Regards

[ ] Re: 'Milk'> > > > > Tony, > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)> > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.> > Best, Pat>__________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My idea of non-processed would include frozen vegetables, preferably no salt added, canned single item foods like tomatoes, or fruit. Obviously these are processed to kill bacteria, preserve the food, and stay edible a long time.

"Processed" foods are "Marie Calendar ....", eg., and include tofu, chocolate milk, cheese, salami, ham, and marinated, pickled, brined anything.

Artificial foods would be tofu, the multitude of things made from soybeans, and things made with hyrdolyzed vegetable protein, HFCS, maltodextrin, MSG, autolyzed yeast extract, modified corn starch, eg.

Imagine what we used in 1965 - flour, corn meal, sugar, yeast, honey, vinegar, fresh meats, chicken, turkey, fresh veggies, fresh fruits, canned peaches, beans and tomatoes, and milk, cheese, cracked wheat bread, eggs. And oleo, not oils.

And then KFC came to town.

Regards

[ ] Re: 'Milk'

Hi Tony:Interesting post about artificial foods.I have a question: would you object to a 'processed' food containing several ingredients each of which you would classify as 'generally healthy if consumed on its own'?If you would object, what would be your reason? Do you believe that mixing together healthy foods can somehow make the mixture unhealthy? And if you do believe that, can I assume you never eat a meal/recipe containing more than one ingredient? And if you do cook/eat multiple ingredient recipes, how does that differ from a food processing company 'cooking' up a recipe from generally healthy ingredients?Your post seemed to imply that you *would* object to a processed food made from healthy ingredients. But perhaps I misread it?Thanks.> >> > Hi folks:> > > > For a while I have been trying, and to a limited extent experimenting with, different substitutes for milk.> > > > Years ago I used to drink large amounts of regular skim milk. But I found two problems. First, it made me feel tired (and babies usually fall asleep after drinking milk, so it may not be a coincidence.) Second, there have been a couple of studies which found an association between milk consumption and advanced prostate cancer. One was done in Italy, and the other, IIRC, was a finding of the Physicians Health Study. They were posted here some time ago.> > > > There are quite a few non-animal sources of 'milk'. I am aware of products made from soybeans, almonds, rice and oats. Perhaps there are others I am not aware of. > > > > The calorie counts - per 250 ml cup - of these are as follows:> > > > From regular cow's milk: skim 90 kcal; 1% 110; 2% 130; homogenised 160.> > > > The soy milks I have seen contain anywhere between 70 and 110 calories.> > > > Rice milk, between 110 and 130.> > > > Almond milk, between 40 and 130.> > > > The only oat milk I have encountered contained 120 calories per cup.> > > > Most of these products contain sugar. Not a big surprise as cow's milk also contains sugar. But the almond milk that had only 40 calories per cup was labeled as "Unsweetened". Many seem to be trying to disguise the sugar content by describing it as something else. 'Evaporated Cane Juice' comes to mind in more than one case.> > > > If anyone has used these products and has something interesting about them to share with us, please post. In particular it would be interesting to know if anyone has found any of them to be a good replacement for milk in recipes that call for it.> > > > I have tried all of them except soy milk, and have found they are an excellent substitute for eating with things like rolled oats.> > > > Rodney.> >>__________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But let me ask you this.

Why has no one made a product like tofu from say pinto beans?

Why soy? Is it because so many are allergic to soy?

Granted it has more protein, but why have we seen so little fresh or frozen soybeans?

Pardon my paranoia, most centenarians, I'd bet, never ate soy.

I appreciate your desire to eat less animal, my problem is beans are off my list of edible foods. Except green beans and lentils.

Regards

[ ] Re: 'Milk'> >> >> >> >> > Tony,> > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)> >> > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.> >> > Best, Pat> >> > > > > > __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.> http://www.eset.com>__________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi JW:

Your classification of foods into 'non-processed', 'processed' and 'artificial'

is interesting.

Seems to me most of us here can broadly agree for the most part about what is

likely healthy and what is not. For me (always ready to be persuaded, by

evidence, otherwise) healthy foods 'as is' are OK. A combination of healthy

foods, mixed together without chemical alteration of some kind, other than by

heat, are OK. Healthy foods without addition of unnecessary calories or

unhealthy 'foods' (trans fats, saturated fats containing myristic acid, ....)

are OK. And of course different types of heat have different effects, some

healthier than others.

Chemically altered foods I am suspicious about unless there is a long history of

not being apparently harmful (wine) or with clear evidence of benefit. Foods

with chemicals added that are not obviously nutrients (gypsum, formaldehyde) I

am suspicious about unless there is evidence otherwise. But even with those I

am open-minded - I eat natto occasionally, weird as it is! Of course ten years

from now I may believe that was a mistake, or a very important benefit.

Foods containing unusually large quantities of known essential nutrients I am

also cautious about since, for example, all the essential metallic nutrients are

dangerous if consumed in amounts several multiples of the RDA. And methionine

may be an issue even in relatively moderate quantities.

However, to return to the original point of this thread, oat milk, almond milk

and rice milk are, as far as I can see, 'mixtures' of healthy foods which have

not undergone chemical alteration. So, by my criteria, they seem to be OK. But

if anyone disagrees with this, I would very much like to hear about it

I would also like to hear anyone's experiences with the use of these products in

recipes, of which sauce preparation (successful or unsuccessful) is one

prominent example.

And please let us know how your experiment with pinto bean tofu turns out, JW.

Rodney.

> > >

> > > I shy away from making any " foods " at home - just a fear I have of

contamination.

> > > I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about

calling it what it IS.

> > > What is it - an extract?

> > >

> > > Regards

> > >

> > > [ ] Re: 'Milk'

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Tony,

> > > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use

of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives

and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the

non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside

what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and

ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not

yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best

made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not

have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)

> > >

> > > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind.

A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that

allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look

for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a

vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.

> > >

> > > Best, Pat

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________

> >

> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

> > http://www.eset.com

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________

>

> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

> http://www.eset.com

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a vegan. I absolutely love the enriched soymilk.I also use almond milk.Rodney, I greatly respect your opinion, would you mind expanding on your comment, "I am a little suspicious of soybeans..."http://nutrition.about.com/od/meatsandproteinsources/tp/dispelsoymyths.htmFrom: perspect1111 <perspect1111@...>Subject: [ ] Re: 'Milk' Date: Monday, December 21, 2009, 2:09 AM

 

Hi JW:

Well to answer for myself: I want to avoid animal milk for reasons we have discussed here previously - while it is great for babies it may not be healthy, especially for older males. But milk is a useful product. It goes well with some things (cereals have been mentioned) and can be very useful in recipes. For example, in making sauces which can make foods many of us here believe are desirable to eat quite tasty.

So I would like something I believe to be composed of healthy ingredients, which I can use in place of regular milk, for these other purposes. I am a little suspicious of soybeans, so oats, almonds or rice seem like great alternatives, if they work well for what I want them for (do the sauces turn out the way I would like them to be?).

Input based on other people's experiences with these other substitute milk products would be helpful to me. Which is why I posted about it. Hope the above clarifies this at least somewhat.

Rodney.

> >

> > I shy away from making any "foods" at home - just a fear I have of contamination.

> > I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about calling it what it IS.

> > What is it - an extract?

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > [ ] Re: 'Milk'

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Tony,

> > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)

> >

> > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind. A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.

> >

> > Best, Pat

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________

>

> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

> http://www.eset. com

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi :

To answer your question: Some years ago I saw a discussion about soybeans which

included the 'dementia' association with tofu. This association may, of course,

be a function of its preparation rather than of the beans from which it is made.

I do not know. As far as I am aware, no one knows. Yet.

Seeing this discussion caused me to look around the (highly unreliable) internet

for more information about soybeans, and I found the entire spectrum of

opinions. Either it was the world's most wonderful super food which prevented

and cured everything known to ail man or woman, or else it was the next best

thing to potassium cyanide.

After reading all that stuff I had no way to know who was right. So I made an

arbitrary decision that it was unlikely to be harmful not to eat it. And it

might possibly be harmful to eat it, particularly for males with the 'artifical

estrogens' argument.

If I had found persuasive evidence from serious studies one way or the other I

could have made a better decision, one way or the other.

This is why I like to use the wording: " I am a bit suspicious of soy products,

and especially so of tofu. "

Not very persuasive, I realize. But that is the story.

Rodney.

>

> > >

>

> > > I shy away from making any " foods " at home - just a fear I have of

contamination.

>

> > > I don't mind what people eat - just don't call it milk. how about

calling it what it IS.

>

> > > What is it - an extract?

>

> > >

>

> > > Regards

>

> > >

>

> > > [ ] Re: 'Milk'

>

> > >

>

> > >

>

> > >

>

> > >

>

> > > Tony,

>

> > > Without getting into the whole natural vs unnatural debate on human use

of non-human milk, of so-called 'natural' foods, processed foods, food additives

and the like (whew!), I just want to point out that one _can_ make some of the

non-dairy milks easily at home without chemical additives (and let's leave aside

what is 'chemical' - organic or inorganic - for the moment too). Oatmilk and

ricemilk are the easiest to make. Almond milk also is easy, although I've not

yet done this. Soymilk, I understand, needs a bit more work at home and is best

made with a soymilk maker, although I believe that modern contraption may not

have always been available to those who would have made it in the past :)

>

> > >

>

> > > Some people, one should be reminded, cannot use dairy milk of any kind.

A large number of the earth's population do not have that mutated gene that

allows some others to use dairy milk without illness. They quite reasonably look

for an alternative. There need be nothing unnatural about substituting a

vegetable version for an animal product. It's all food, just a little different.

>

> > >

>

> > > Best, Pat

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > __________ NOD32 4389 (20090902) Information __________

>

> >

>

> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

>

> > http://www.eset. com

>

> >

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...