Re: Inaccuracies in The Milk Book?

[Guest guest]

> I have a question for those who have read The Milk Book by

s. In another group that I subscribe to, there was a

short discussion about the book, and one of members listed some of

what she thought were inaccuracies in it. I am reposting (with her

permission) what she wrote below, and I would like to know if other

people here agree with it and have noticed other problems with the

book. It appears that WAPF is so pro-milk that they will allow

serious inaccuracies in books that promote raw milk.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Those are very fascinating and useful critiques of that book. The

two obvious mistakes that stick in my mind about that book are his

shockingly ignorant and repeated statements about coconut oil and

vitamin D, although these mistakes are essentially harmless and don't

compromise his arguments or pose a risk to their believers (unlike

the mistakes you explained). Generally I found the book a little

annoying in style because of so many failed attempts at humor. All

that aside, until Schmid's brilliant book of last year, it was the

only book giving a solid argument for raw milk. It does contain a

lot of valuable historical and scientific information, and it

definitely succeeds at capturing the essential point about " clean "

vs " pasteurized " , which is profound and essentially ungrasped by

99.9+% of America, so it's still worth reading in my opinion,

secondarily to Schmid. Also, the chapter of mother's milk was really

eye-opening to me, but maybe that's because I had never read anything

on that topic before, and I suspect there are even better texts about

it. Like any other discourse, we have to take responsibility for

what we believe and maximize the number of independent sources we

draw from. What should be done with respect to WAPF is having a

knowledgeable person on these medical topics write a detailed essay

explaining the inaccuracies and contentious points in that book, so

the book can still be promoted for its definite positive value with

full enthusiasm by also promoting the essay alongside as an essential

accompaniment. Such elegant and powerful solutions are often well

within our reach. Of course it reflects very poorly on the author

(s) that he failed to take such an initiative himself,

especially given the obvious opportunity to include such an " update "

in the reissue of the book itself. It's the eternal dilemma of

quality control.

Mike

SE Pennsylvania

The best way to predict the future is to invent it. --Alan Kay