Re: Lack of analytical rigor

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/26/2002 8:19:05 PM Central Daylight Time,

dkemnitz2000@... writes:

> >>>>>>>>>Here is an animal interest story from Kansas:

> I've been having trouble keeping the yearling bull calf from nursing

> while in the wheat pasture grazing with his mother. He was weaned and

> hadn't nursed for probably four months to my knowledge. But recently

> I wanted him to graze in the same pasture as his mother cause I had no

> other wheat field fenced. So yesterday I had him on the lead( we walk

> the calf somewhat like folks walk their pets), took him to pasture and

> tied him to a wagon to eat. An hour or so later I noticed mother had

> moved over to let him nurse. Isn't that interesting

Fun isn't it? I had some goats away from mom for 2 months, that would make

them 5 months old at least. They managed to push through the gate and were

out there last night milking for me. Needless to say they are now in a field

with 2 fences and 3 gates between them and mom.

Belinda

[Guest guest]

At 12:27 PM 4/26/2002 -0500, you wrote:

>I am pretty confident that I could show within 6 months (if not for the

>obvious ethical roadblocks ;-) ) that a newborn human baby fed exclusively

>lactose will die LONG before reaching maturity. Using the RealMilk.com

>standard for making research based claims, I would probably write a

>statement such as " Babies fed lactose die before maturity. "

You don't need to make such an experiment -- it's been done! You can't

raise a human infant on cow milk which is why they created Enfamil (wet

nurses being in short supply). Enfamil is pastureurized, high heat and all,

but it has lots of other stuff added too, and for the most part the Enfamil

babies survive just fine (albeit with higher odds of getting leukemia and a

few other issues: I'm a definite believer in breast feeding).

A agree the statement is misleading as is, and it's a much more complicated

issue than one would think. But " milk replacer " isn't the same as plain

pastuerized milk, or plain milk from the cow, and I don't think there are

many farmers who don't supplement the calve's feed at this point (as has

already been pointed out). And modern cows aren't bred to be good mothers

anyway, nor is it clear that their milk is still ideal for calves.

A similar experiment was done by a cat food company (I think, it's been

awhile) on feeding cats rabbits. If they fed cats whole, raw rabbits, they

survived fine and so did their kittens. But if they cooked the rabbits,

they had a high mortality rate and many of the kittens were born deformed

(not ALL, but more). So they decided that enzymes and vitamins were being

killed off by the cooking process. Note, however, that you can feed a cat

on canned cat food their whole life and for the most part they do ok: the

cat food companies add enough vitamins back in for the cats to do ok. Yeah,

I know, they'd still do better on raw rabbit! But you could make the

statement " cats don't do well when fed only cooked food " and it would be

accurate, albeit incomplete.

Heidi Schuppenhauer

Trillium Custom Software Inc.

heidis@...

[Guest guest]

> I am pretty confident that I could show within 6 months (if not for

the

> obvious ethical roadblocks ;-) ) that a newborn human baby fed

exclusively

> lactose will die LONG before reaching maturity. Using the

RealMilk.com

> standard for making research based claims, I would probably write a

> statement such as " Babies fed lactose die before maturity. "

>

> Anybody care to claim that such a statement wouldn't be wrong?

Anybody care

> to try to explain how the current RealMilk.com statement differs?

>

> Thanks!

>

>

>>>>>>>>>>> in answer to this post, lactose is not the same

" food " as pasteurized milk so how could that test corroborate?

's word not mine. The pasteurized milk in Carmen's referenced

article was WASTE milk, not milk and not raw fresh whole milk either.

As I've indicated that article is the only research article I've read

regarding this " calves fed pasteurized milk die before reaching

maturity " discussion. Did you define maturity, pasteurization or milk

yet? Waste milk is animal feed, not food, by definition. I'll extend

an invitation to you to visit Kansas and our farm for a tour. Not

that we'll prove anything regarding pasteurized milk, however we can

share some ideas first hand. You can see our yearling bull calf with

horns. We had a 100% calf crop last year, however this year 0% cause

we have no bull. And my wife assisted parturition. And we still

currently have fresh raw yellow milk cause the cow's still producing

(milk). Time to NT: I planted sweet potatoes several days before we

had 40+ mph winds and frost too, which already has killed

approximately half of them. The frost probably damaged the peach

buds, cherry buds and strawberries too. That's the NT report for

today, except for one message I wrote yesterday, which I will post if

I can find it and learn how to post it. It apparently was lost

yesterday in this timesaving modern thing called the computer.

it takes me an hour or so to put together one of these essays in final

draft so let me know whether they're worth my time and yours. Best

regards, Dennis

[Guest guest]

> >I am pretty confident that I could show within 6 months (if not for

the

> >obvious ethical roadblocks ;-) ) that a newborn human baby fed

exclusively

> >lactose will die LONG before reaching maturity. Using the

RealMilk.com

>

<<<<<<<<<Clipped by Dennis>>>>>>

> already been pointed out). And modern cows aren't bred to be good

mothers

> anyway, nor is it clear that their milk is still ideal for calves.

>

>>>>>>>>>Here is an animal interest story from Kansas:

I've been having trouble keeping the yearling bull calf from nursing

while in the wheat pasture grazing with his mother. He was weaned and

hadn't nursed for probably four months to my knowledge. But recently

I wanted him to graze in the same pasture as his mother cause I had no

other wheat field fenced. So yesterday I had him on the lead( we walk

the calf somewhat like folks walk their pets), took him to pasture and

tied him to a wagon to eat. An hour or so later I noticed mother had

moved over to let him nurse. Isn't that interesting. So today I had

to graze him elsewhere. Dennis

> Clipped By Dennis>>>>>>>>

>

>

> Heidi Schuppenhauer

> Trillium Custom Software Inc.

> heidis@t...

[Guest guest]

> >I am pretty confident that I could show within 6 months (if not for

the

> ><<<<<clipped by Dennis>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>Interesting you mention Enfamil. My first job out of the

land grant institution was Quality Control Manager of a cheese plant

in superior,NE which manufactured lactose for that Enfamil. We did no

animal testing to my knowledge. The next year I moved to Springfield,

MO where among other things we blended Enfamil. I sort of forgot

about those good ole days in MO. In the lab, techs initialled every

analytical test performed and filled out every form for Mead

in triplicate. You see Mead a big pharmaceutical company owned

Enfamil in those days. They were getting rid of cows then. And trying

to control them. Enuf already, eh? Dennis

> You don't need to make such an experiment -- it's been done! You

can't

> raise a human infant on cow milk which is why they created Enfamil

(wet

> nurses being in short supply). Enfamil is pastureurized, high heat

and all,

> but it has lots of other stuff added too, and for the most part the

Enfamil

> babies survive just fine (albeit with higher odds of getting

leukemia and a

> few other issues: I'm a definite believer in breast feeding).

>

> A agree the statement is misleading as is, and it's a much more

complicated

> issue than one would think. But " milk replacer " isn't the same as

plain

> pastuerized milk, or plain milk from the cow, and I don't think

there are

> many farmers who don't supplement the calve's feed at this point (as

has

> already been pointed out). And modern cows aren't bred to be good

mothers

> anyway, nor is it clear that their milk is still ideal for calves.

>

> A similar experiment was done by a cat food company (I think, it's

been

> awhile) on feeding cats rabbits. If they fed cats whole, raw

rabbits, they

> survived fine and so did their kittens. But if they cooked the

rabbits,

> they had a high mortality rate and many of the kittens were born

deformed

> (not ALL, but more). So they decided that enzymes and vitamins were

being

> killed off by the cooking process. Note, however, that you can feed

a cat

> on canned cat food their whole life and for the most part they do

ok: the

> cat food companies add enough vitamins back in for the cats to do

ok. Yeah,

> I know, they'd still do better on raw rabbit! But you could make the

> statement " cats don't do well when fed only cooked food " and it

would be

> accurate, albeit incomplete.

>

>

>

> Heidi Schuppenhauer

> Trillium Custom Software Inc.

> heidis@t...

>>>>>>>>>A guy I buy farm machinery (essentially junk) from, told me

pasteurized milk doesn't bother his cats! He has 30 or 40 wild cats

in an old house and barn along the Smoky Hill River which he's fed

outdated factory milk for generations. Do you want his name or written

statement for our study? I'm including this true story for late night

humor. It's true though! HaHaHee.Hee. Dennis