RE: sugar -- milk a no-no?

[Guest guest]

Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

Thanks for the enlightenment,

Steve

[Guest guest]

Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

Thanks for the enlightenment,

Steve

[Guest guest]

> Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

> list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

> DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

> am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

> DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

> Thanks for the enlightenment,

> Steve

Sugar, weight gain, the lactose intolerance, fats... the reality that we do

have options besides cows milk which is by nature designed to fatten up a

calf (and humans)

Studies such as the one posted below as well as others that show milk/milk

products cause congestion in people with upper respiratory (asthma,

emphysema) problems and so on and on and on...

Study and link posted below -- one of many -- as well as many of us with

children now getting the " no " message from our pediatricians that milk

(cows) is not the " healthy " source of anything or the " healthy " choice for

our kids -- terms like " milk babies " -- over weight children and children

with respiratory difficulties anyway being complicated by the use of cows

milk... " Got Milk " is just an advertising campaign... not necessarily the

truth behind milk. The more studies, the more show it is not a healthy

choice for human consumption...

For all those who are not DS (or variation of) milk does have enormous

amounts of fats and sugars even in skim milk (no fat, still loaded with

sugar) -- all of this " Milk Is Evil " may totally not apply to you so if it

doesn't just skip it / delete it / or whatever your comfortable with... not

every " body " is the same so milk may be fine for you... and if it is then no

big deal *shrug*

hugz,

~denise

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moo not necessarily good for you

>

>

> By NEAL D. BARNARD

> PHYSICIAN

>

> Syndicated columnist Rich Lowry recently asked what anybody could have

> against cow's milk ( " Milk is not your enemy, " Oct. 30). The fact that an

> intelligent columnist such as Lowry could ask such a question shows what

an

> abysmal job the medical community has done of educating people about how

> foods, including milk, contribute to health problems.

>

> The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has been publicizing the

> surprising dangers of cow's milk products since 1992 after a New England

> Journal of Medicine study of 142 diabetic children showed that every

single

> child had antibodies against a particular cow's milk protein. By 1994,

> evidence from more than 100 studies showed milk proteins could trigger an

> autoimmune reaction that can destroy a susceptible child's

> insulin-producing cells, leading to diabetes. Dr. Spock and I

held

> a news conference alerting parents to this potential risk. But even the

> beloved Dr. Spock was no match for the dairy industry's ability to

> obfuscate health issues in a deluge of cute " milk mustache " and " got

milk? "

> ads.

>

> Milk's potential problems don't stop at childhood diabetes. Researchers

> have also turned their attention to the causes of prostate cancer, and

milk

> is squarely in their sights. Remember that cow's milk was designed by

> nature for growing calves. It contains not only an enormous amount of fat

> (half its calories) and sugar (one-third its calories) but also dozens of

> hormones and growth factors that are natural for a rapidly growing calf,

> but not part of a normal human diet.

>

> Milk's ability to promote rapid growth may be why 16 research studies,

> including two from Harvard, have shown that milk-drinking men have

> substantially higher risk of prostate cancer, compared with men who avoid

> it. Milk apparently alters a man's hormone balance in such a way that

> cancer cells are more likely to grow and spread.

>

> Of course, milk sometimes presents more immediate symptoms. For the

> millions of people who are lactose intolerant, a glass of milk can cause

> painful cramps and diarrhea. Lactose intolerance is not a disease. It

> simply reflects the normal loss of the milk-digesting enzyme after the age

> of weaning. A genetic mutation carried by most Caucasians causes this

> enzyme to persist into adulthood, preventing these symptoms. However, 70

> percent of African Americans and Native Americans, 90 percent of Asian

> Americans and most Hispanic Americans are lactose intolerant, as are many

> people of Mediterranean heritage.

>

> Unfortunately, although medical doctors have recognized for 30 years that

> lactose intolerance is as normal and common as blue eyes, the national

> school lunch program still refuses to provide soymilk or rice milk or even

> fortified juices as standard alternatives so that kids could pick a drink

> that won't make them sick.

>

> There was a time when soymilk and rice milk products couldn't compete in

> the taste department. No more. They now come in vanilla, chocolate and

> strawberry flavors and in low-fat and calcium-fortified varieties. Schools

> ought to serve them. But, for now, a school that serves soymilk or rice

> milk instead of the dairy variety loses its federal support. Such is the

> power of the dairy industry.

>

> What about calcium? Surprisingly enough, milk does not even promote

healthy

> bones. The Harvard Nurses' Health Study, which followed 78,000 women over

a

> 12-year period, found that those who got the most dairy calcium had no

> protection at all against osteoporosis. In fact, they suffered more

> fractures than women who avoided milk. A similar finding emerged in a

study

> of children in their peak bone-building years. Exercise made a big

> difference for bone density, but variations in dietary calcium -- from

> dairy products or any other source -- made no difference at all.

>

> What? Milk doesn't protect the bones? Not according to the best evidence

we

> have. It turns out that the studies the dairy industry has used to support

> a role for milk in bone health were improperly done. Many did not actually

> test milk at all, but instead used calcium supplements, which may have a

> better effect on bones. Other studies neglected to control for vitamin D,

> which is added to milk and has a bone-protecting effect of its own having

> nothing to do with milk itself. Vitamin D from multivitamins or sunlight

on

> the skin does help protect bones, and milk may be little more than its

> vehicle -- and not an especially good one at that.

>

> Certainly, kids do need calcium. But there is plenty of calcium in greens,

> beans, calcium-enriched orange juice and a full range of fortified

cereals,

> soymilks and endless other products. There is no need to risk prostate

> cancer or bellyaches trying to stomach the calcium in milk.

>

> Let's give our kids a healthier choice.

>

> Neal D. Barnard, M.D., president of the Physicians Committee for

> Responsible Medicine, is a nutrition researcher and author of six books on

> health and preventive medicine. The committee's Healthy School Lunches

> Campaign is found at http://www.healthyschoollunches.org/ " >www.HealthySchoolLunches.org

[Guest guest]

> Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

> list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

> DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

> am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

> DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

> Thanks for the enlightenment,

> Steve

Sugar, weight gain, the lactose intolerance, fats... the reality that we do

have options besides cows milk which is by nature designed to fatten up a

calf (and humans)

Studies such as the one posted below as well as others that show milk/milk

products cause congestion in people with upper respiratory (asthma,

emphysema) problems and so on and on and on...

Study and link posted below -- one of many -- as well as many of us with

children now getting the " no " message from our pediatricians that milk

(cows) is not the " healthy " source of anything or the " healthy " choice for

our kids -- terms like " milk babies " -- over weight children and children

with respiratory difficulties anyway being complicated by the use of cows

milk... " Got Milk " is just an advertising campaign... not necessarily the

truth behind milk. The more studies, the more show it is not a healthy

choice for human consumption...

For all those who are not DS (or variation of) milk does have enormous

amounts of fats and sugars even in skim milk (no fat, still loaded with

sugar) -- all of this " Milk Is Evil " may totally not apply to you so if it

doesn't just skip it / delete it / or whatever your comfortable with... not

every " body " is the same so milk may be fine for you... and if it is then no

big deal *shrug*

hugz,

~denise

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moo not necessarily good for you

>

>

> By NEAL D. BARNARD

> PHYSICIAN

>

> Syndicated columnist Rich Lowry recently asked what anybody could have

> against cow's milk ( " Milk is not your enemy, " Oct. 30). The fact that an

> intelligent columnist such as Lowry could ask such a question shows what

an

> abysmal job the medical community has done of educating people about how

> foods, including milk, contribute to health problems.

>

> The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has been publicizing the

> surprising dangers of cow's milk products since 1992 after a New England

> Journal of Medicine study of 142 diabetic children showed that every

single

> child had antibodies against a particular cow's milk protein. By 1994,

> evidence from more than 100 studies showed milk proteins could trigger an

> autoimmune reaction that can destroy a susceptible child's

> insulin-producing cells, leading to diabetes. Dr. Spock and I

held

> a news conference alerting parents to this potential risk. But even the

> beloved Dr. Spock was no match for the dairy industry's ability to

> obfuscate health issues in a deluge of cute " milk mustache " and " got

milk? "

> ads.

>

> Milk's potential problems don't stop at childhood diabetes. Researchers

> have also turned their attention to the causes of prostate cancer, and

milk

> is squarely in their sights. Remember that cow's milk was designed by

> nature for growing calves. It contains not only an enormous amount of fat

> (half its calories) and sugar (one-third its calories) but also dozens of

> hormones and growth factors that are natural for a rapidly growing calf,

> but not part of a normal human diet.

>

> Milk's ability to promote rapid growth may be why 16 research studies,

> including two from Harvard, have shown that milk-drinking men have

> substantially higher risk of prostate cancer, compared with men who avoid

> it. Milk apparently alters a man's hormone balance in such a way that

> cancer cells are more likely to grow and spread.

>

> Of course, milk sometimes presents more immediate symptoms. For the

> millions of people who are lactose intolerant, a glass of milk can cause

> painful cramps and diarrhea. Lactose intolerance is not a disease. It

> simply reflects the normal loss of the milk-digesting enzyme after the age

> of weaning. A genetic mutation carried by most Caucasians causes this

> enzyme to persist into adulthood, preventing these symptoms. However, 70

> percent of African Americans and Native Americans, 90 percent of Asian

> Americans and most Hispanic Americans are lactose intolerant, as are many

> people of Mediterranean heritage.

>

> Unfortunately, although medical doctors have recognized for 30 years that

> lactose intolerance is as normal and common as blue eyes, the national

> school lunch program still refuses to provide soymilk or rice milk or even

> fortified juices as standard alternatives so that kids could pick a drink

> that won't make them sick.

>

> There was a time when soymilk and rice milk products couldn't compete in

> the taste department. No more. They now come in vanilla, chocolate and

> strawberry flavors and in low-fat and calcium-fortified varieties. Schools

> ought to serve them. But, for now, a school that serves soymilk or rice

> milk instead of the dairy variety loses its federal support. Such is the

> power of the dairy industry.

>

> What about calcium? Surprisingly enough, milk does not even promote

healthy

> bones. The Harvard Nurses' Health Study, which followed 78,000 women over

a

> 12-year period, found that those who got the most dairy calcium had no

> protection at all against osteoporosis. In fact, they suffered more

> fractures than women who avoided milk. A similar finding emerged in a

study

> of children in their peak bone-building years. Exercise made a big

> difference for bone density, but variations in dietary calcium -- from

> dairy products or any other source -- made no difference at all.

>

> What? Milk doesn't protect the bones? Not according to the best evidence

we

> have. It turns out that the studies the dairy industry has used to support

> a role for milk in bone health were improperly done. Many did not actually

> test milk at all, but instead used calcium supplements, which may have a

> better effect on bones. Other studies neglected to control for vitamin D,

> which is added to milk and has a bone-protecting effect of its own having

> nothing to do with milk itself. Vitamin D from multivitamins or sunlight

on

> the skin does help protect bones, and milk may be little more than its

> vehicle -- and not an especially good one at that.

>

> Certainly, kids do need calcium. But there is plenty of calcium in greens,

> beans, calcium-enriched orange juice and a full range of fortified

cereals,

> soymilks and endless other products. There is no need to risk prostate

> cancer or bellyaches trying to stomach the calcium in milk.

>

> Let's give our kids a healthier choice.

>

> Neal D. Barnard, M.D., president of the Physicians Committee for

> Responsible Medicine, is a nutrition researcher and author of six books on

> health and preventive medicine. The committee's Healthy School Lunches

> Campaign is found at http://www.healthyschoollunches.org/ " >www.HealthySchoolLunches.org

[Guest guest]

Is there anything besides Dr. Barnard's findings documented on this

subject, or are we ready to call him the final authority?

I need more then one man's opinion to convince my husband. I am not a milk

drinker, but my husband is and his teeth are great, his bones great and at

50 he still has all of his hair. (I'm not sure but was that mentioned as a

by product of milk drinking? lol )

I certainly believe that there is something out there killing us at an

alarming rate and it is on the increase. All the cancers are on the

increase and I know we are eating hormone-injected foods and meats (you don

t need to be a scholar to figure that one out!) I personally won't

eat eggs or chicken unless it is from a health food store of some type (cage

free). Hens are injected with a ton of hormones to increase the rapidity of

egg laying and then when the poor hens are ready to die from exhaustion they

slaughter them and feed them to us!!

Thanks for the reference

Carol G

Lap RNY 8/24/01

" If you always do whatcha always did,

you will always get whatcha always got "

~*~ Website: www.carollis.com

~*~ Proverbs " As you think, so shall you manifest "

~*~ Dr. Philip McGraw, " If you choose the behavior, accept the consequence. "

-- RE: sugar -- milk a no-no?

> Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

> list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

> DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

> am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

> DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

> Thanks for the enlightenment,

> Steve

Sugar, weight gain, the lactose intolerance, fats... the reality that we do

have options besides cows milk which is by nature designed to fatten up a

calf (and humans)

Studies such as the one posted below as well as others that show milk/milk

products cause congestion in people with upper respiratory (asthma,

emphysema) problems and so on and on and on...

Study and link posted below -- one of many -- as well as many of us with

children now getting the " no " message from our pediatricians that milk

(cows) is not the " healthy " source of anything or the " healthy " choice for

our kids -- terms like " milk babies " -- over weight children and children

with respiratory difficulties anyway being complicated by the use of cows

milk... " Got Milk " is just an advertising campaign... not necessarily the

truth behind milk. The more studies, the more show it is not a healthy

choice for human consumption...

For all those who are not DS (or variation of) milk does have enormous

amounts of fats and sugars even in skim milk (no fat, still loaded with

sugar) -- all of this " Milk Is Evil " may totally not apply to you so if it

doesn't just skip it / delete it / or whatever your comfortable with... not

every " body " is the same so milk may be fine for you... and if it is then no

big deal *shrug*

hugz,

~denise

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moo not necessarily good for you

>

>

> By NEAL D. BARNARD

> PHYSICIAN

>

> Syndicated columnist Rich Lowry recently asked what anybody could have

> against cow's milk ( " Milk is not your enemy, " Oct. 30). The fact that an

> intelligent columnist such as Lowry could ask such a question shows what

an

> abysmal job the medical community has done of educating people about how

> foods, including milk, contribute to health problems.

>

> The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has been publicizing the

> surprising dangers of cow's milk products since 1992 after a New England

> Journal of Medicine study of 142 diabetic children showed that every

single

> child had antibodies against a particular cow's milk protein. By 1994,

> evidence from more than 100 studies showed milk proteins could trigger an

> autoimmune reaction that can destroy a susceptible child's

> insulin-producing cells, leading to diabetes. Dr. Spock and I

held

> a news conference alerting parents to this potential risk. But even the

> beloved Dr. Spock was no match for the dairy industry's ability to

> obfuscate health issues in a deluge of cute " milk mustache " and " got

milk? "

> ads.

>

> Milk's potential problems don't stop at childhood diabetes. Researchers

> have also turned their attention to the causes of prostate cancer, and

milk

> is squarely in their sights. Remember that cow's milk was designed by

> nature for growing calves. It contains not only an enormous amount of fat

> (half its calories) and sugar (one-third its calories) but also dozens of

> hormones and growth factors that are natural for a rapidly growing calf,

> but not part of a normal human diet.

>

> Milk's ability to promote rapid growth may be why 16 research studies,

> including two from Harvard, have shown that milk-drinking men have

> substantially higher risk of prostate cancer, compared with men who avoid

> it. Milk apparently alters a man's hormone balance in such a way that

> cancer cells are more likely to grow and spread.

>

> Of course, milk sometimes presents more immediate symptoms. For the

> millions of people who are lactose intolerant, a glass of milk can cause

> painful cramps and diarrhea. Lactose intolerance is not a disease. It

> simply reflects the normal loss of the milk-digesting enzyme after the age

> of weaning. A genetic mutation carried by most Caucasians causes this

> enzyme to persist into adulthood, preventing these symptoms. However, 70

> percent of African Americans and Native Americans, 90 percent of Asian

> Americans and most Hispanic Americans are lactose intolerant, as are many

> people of Mediterranean heritage.

>

> Unfortunately, although medical doctors have recognized for 30 years that

> lactose intolerance is as normal and common as blue eyes, the national

> school lunch program still refuses to provide soymilk or rice milk or even

> fortified juices as standard alternatives so that kids could pick a drink

> that won't make them sick.

>

> There was a time when soymilk and rice milk products couldn't compete in

> the taste department. No more. They now come in vanilla, chocolate and

> strawberry flavors and in low-fat and calcium-fortified varieties. Schools

> ought to serve them. But, for now, a school that serves soymilk or rice

> milk instead of the dairy variety loses its federal support. Such is the

> power of the dairy industry.

>

> What about calcium? Surprisingly enough, milk does not even promote

healthy

> bones. The Harvard Nurses' Health Study, which followed 78,000 women over

a

> 12-year period, found that those who got the most dairy calcium had no

> protection at all against osteoporosis. In fact, they suffered more

> fractures than women who avoided milk. A similar finding emerged in a

study

> of children in their peak bone-building years. Exercise made a big

> difference for bone density, but variations in dietary calcium -- from

> dairy products or any other source -- made no difference at all.

>

> What? Milk doesn't protect the bones? Not according to the best evidence

we

> have. It turns out that the studies the dairy industry has used to support

> a role for milk in bone health were improperly done. Many did not actually

> test milk at all, but instead used calcium supplements, which may have a

> better effect on bones. Other studies neglected to control for vitamin D,

> which is added to milk and has a bone-protecting effect of its own having

> nothing to do with milk itself. Vitamin D from multivitamins or sunlight

on

> the skin does help protect bones, and milk may be little more than its

> vehicle -- and not an especially good one at that.

>

> Certainly, kids do need calcium. But there is plenty of calcium in greens,

> beans, calcium-enriched orange juice and a full range of fortified

cereals,

> soymilks and endless other products. There is no need to risk prostate

> cancer or bellyaches trying to stomach the calcium in milk.

>

> Let's give our kids a healthier choice.

>

> Neal D. Barnard, M.D., president of the Physicians Committee for

> Responsible Medicine, is a nutrition researcher and author of six books on

> health and preventive medicine. The committee's Healthy School Lunches

> Campaign is found at http://www.healthyschoollunches.org/ " >www.HealthySchoolLunches.org

Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

> Is there anything besides Dr. Barnard's findings documented on this

subject, or are we ready to call him the final authority?<<

*** I'm strongly against calling any one person/one study EVER a final

authority on any topic!!! The one I posted was the most handiest at the time

of posting is all...

My dad is end stages emphysema and has been taken off all milk products due

to congestion (several studies I've read on that but don't have digitally)

and my 5 year old has asthma and other upper respiratory issues and her

allergist and pediatrician have both shown me studies of the milk =

increased congestion so both of them are and have been off milk for a

while...

>>> I need more then one man's opinion to convince my husband. I am not a

milk drinker, but my husband is and his teeth are great, his bones great and

at 50 he still has all of his hair. (I'm not sure but was that mentioned as

a by product of milk drinking? lol )<<<

Ya' might go to the link associated with that particular finding and ask

the author for the exact references he used to compile the information he

gave in that one paper -- when I'm researching a particular issue that is

usually where I start... one paper, then the references, the study of those

references and the references the references point to -- actual studies, how

they were conducted, on who and for how long... the only way to get beyond

the first paper that I know of is to start with the references the author

uses to draw his/her conclusions.

> Thanks for the reference

Your welcome -- my own references that I tend to keep and follow have more

to do with school age children and the elderly at risk ones since those

topics concern me the most -- like many, I don't touch the stuff so I don't

really bother with the papers/references that would concern me since I don't

consume it.

I do believe we should all do our own follow-ups to any paper posted and

none of them are final authorities on anything -- just a starting point for

anyone who wants to research the particulars in more detail.

hugz,

~denise

[Guest guest]

> Is there anything besides Dr. Barnard's findings documented on this

subject, or are we ready to call him the final authority?<<

*** I'm strongly against calling any one person/one study EVER a final

authority on any topic!!! The one I posted was the most handiest at the time

of posting is all...

My dad is end stages emphysema and has been taken off all milk products due

to congestion (several studies I've read on that but don't have digitally)

and my 5 year old has asthma and other upper respiratory issues and her

allergist and pediatrician have both shown me studies of the milk =

increased congestion so both of them are and have been off milk for a

while...

>>> I need more then one man's opinion to convince my husband. I am not a

milk drinker, but my husband is and his teeth are great, his bones great and

at 50 he still has all of his hair. (I'm not sure but was that mentioned as

a by product of milk drinking? lol )<<<

Ya' might go to the link associated with that particular finding and ask

the author for the exact references he used to compile the information he

gave in that one paper -- when I'm researching a particular issue that is

usually where I start... one paper, then the references, the study of those

references and the references the references point to -- actual studies, how

they were conducted, on who and for how long... the only way to get beyond

the first paper that I know of is to start with the references the author

uses to draw his/her conclusions.

> Thanks for the reference

Your welcome -- my own references that I tend to keep and follow have more

to do with school age children and the elderly at risk ones since those

topics concern me the most -- like many, I don't touch the stuff so I don't

really bother with the papers/references that would concern me since I don't

consume it.

I do believe we should all do our own follow-ups to any paper posted and

none of them are final authorities on anything -- just a starting point for

anyone who wants to research the particulars in more detail.

hugz,

~denise

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the insights, . At least I understand now where

people are coming from.

--Steve

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the insights, . At least I understand now where

people are coming from.

--Steve

[Guest guest]

The reverse of that is my husband, who was a heavy milk drinker all

of his life, is bald, has an upper plate in his mouth,

and..........had a heart attack 4 months after his 50th birthday. We

assume that his bones are fine but don't know because he's never had

a need for a dexascan. He's still taking medication for high chol.

and high blood pressure and yes, he does still use milk but now it's

non-fat only on his cereal. He doesn't drink the stuff by the gallon

and rarely even by the glass any more.

Alice

The Loon

RNY 12/28/00

> Is there anything besides Dr. Barnard's findings documented on this

> subject, or are we ready to call him the final authority?

>

> I need more then one man's opinion to convince my husband. I am not

a milk

> drinker, but my husband is and his teeth are great, his bones great

and at

> 50 he still has all of his hair.

[Guest guest]

I drank more milk than any human on earth, I think. Still got dried loofah

for bones, teeth are nothing to brag about and am much thinner since it

being forbidden by my doc. I'd never have given it up voluntarily, no

matter how sick it made me, because I TOTALLY bought into the marketing

hype. And I LIKED it. Just like other forms of candy.

I truly thought my doc had slipped a cog, but I went along with him. LOL!

I only wish he could stopped me 10 yrs sooner.

m

Re: sugar -- milk a no-no?

> The reverse of that is my husband, who was a heavy milk drinker all

> of his life, is bald, has an upper plate in his mouth,

> and..........had a heart attack 4 months after his 50th birthday. We

> assume that his bones are fine but don't know because he's never had

> a need for a dexascan. He's still taking medication for high chol.

> and high blood pressure and yes, he does still use milk but now it's

> non-fat only on his cereal. He doesn't drink the stuff by the gallon

> and rarely even by the glass any more.

> Alice

> The Loon

> RNY 12/28/00

>

> > Is there anything besides Dr. Barnard's findings documented on this

> > subject, or are we ready to call him the final authority?

> >

> > I need more then one man's opinion to convince my husband. I am not

> a milk

> > drinker, but my husband is and his teeth are great, his bones great

> and at

> > 50 he still has all of his hair.

>

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Read this article put out by a physician who has studied nutrition...(a rare

bird!) It is quite enlightning on the issue of milk.

Regards~

´¨¨)) -:¦:-

¸.·´ .·´¨¨))

((¸¸.·´ ..·´ -:¦:- Jacque

-:¦:- ((¸¸.·´*

www.jacquemiller.gasupusa.com

Discount Gasoline! Save 21%

with a Costco-like membership!

Ask me how!

Wednesday, November 6, 2002

Moo not necessarily good for you

By NEAL D. BARNARD

PHYSICIAN

Syndicated columnist Rich Lowry recently asked what anybody could have

against cow's milk ( " Milk is not your enemy, " Oct. 30). The fact that an

intelligent columnist such as Lowry could ask such a question shows what an

abysmal job the medical community has done of educating people about how

foods, including milk, contribute to health problems.

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has been publicizing the

surprising dangers of cow's milk products since 1992 after a New England

Journal of Medicine study of 142 diabetic children showed that every single

child had antibodies against a particular cow's milk protein. By 1994,

evidence from more than 100 studies showed milk proteins could trigger an

autoimmune reaction that can destroy a susceptible child's insulin-producing

cells, leading to diabetes. Dr. Spock and I held a news conference

alerting parents to this potential risk. But even the beloved Dr. Spock was

no match for the dairy industry's ability to obfuscate health issues in a

deluge of cute " milk mustache " and " got milk? " ads.

Milk's potential problems don't stop at childhood diabetes. Researchers have

also turned their attention to the causes of prostate cancer, and milk is

squarely in their sights. Remember that cow's milk was designed by nature for

growing calves. It contains not only an enormous amount of fat (half its

calories) and sugar (one-third its calories) but also dozens of hormones and

growth factors that are natural for a rapidly growing calf, but not part of a

normal human diet.

Milk's ability to promote rapid growth may be why 16 research studies,

including two from Harvard, have shown that milk-drinking men have

substantially higher risk of prostate cancer, compared with men who avoid it.

Milk apparently alters a man's hormone balance in such a way that cancer

cells are more likely to grow and spread.

Of course, milk sometimes presents more immediate symptoms. For the millions

of people who are lactose intolerant, a glass of milk can cause painful

cramps and diarrhea. Lactose intolerance is not a disease. It simply reflects

the normal loss of the milk-digesting enzyme after the age of weaning. A

genetic mutation carried by most Caucasians causes this enzyme to persist

into adulthood, preventing these symptoms. However, 70 percent of African

Americans and Native Americans, 90 percent of Asian Americans and most

Hispanic Americans are lactose intolerant, as are many people of

Mediterranean heritage.

Unfortunately, although medical doctors have recognized for 30 years that

lactose intolerance is as normal and common as blue eyes, the national school

lunch program still refuses to provide soymilk or rice milk or even fortified

juices as standard alternatives so that kids could pick a drink that won't

make them sick.

There was a time when soymilk and rice milk products couldn't compete in the

taste department. No more. They now come in vanilla, chocolate and strawberry

flavors and in low-fat and calcium-fortified varieties. Schools ought to

serve them. But, for now, a school that serves soymilk or rice milk instead

of the dairy variety loses its federal support. Such is the power of the

dairy industry.

What about calcium? Surprisingly enough, milk does not even promote healthy

bones. The Harvard Nurses' Health Study, which followed 78,000 women over a

12-year period, found that those who got the most dairy calcium had no

protection at all against osteoporosis. In fact, they suffered more fractures

than women who avoided milk. A similar finding emerged in a study of children

in their peak bone-building years. Exercise made a big difference for bone

density, but variations in dietary calcium -- from dairy products or any

other source -- made no difference at all.

What? Milk doesn't protect the bones? Not according to the best evidence we

have. It turns out that the studies the dairy industry has used to support a

role for milk in bone health were improperly done. Many did not actually test

milk at all, but instead used calcium supplements, which may have a better

effect on bones. Other studies neglected to control for vitamin D, which is

added to milk and has a bone-protecting effect of its own having nothing to

do with milk itself. Vitamin D from multivitamins or sunlight on the skin

does help protect bones, and milk may be little more than its vehicle -- and

not an especially good one at that.

Certainly, kids do need calcium. But there is plenty of calcium in greens,

beans, calcium-enriched orange juice and a full range of fortified cereals,

soymilks and endless other products. There is no need to risk prostate cancer

or bellyaches trying to stomach the calcium in milk.

Let's give our kids a healthier choice.

Neal D. Barnard, M.D., president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible

Medicine, is a nutrition researcher and author of six books on health and

preventive medicine. The committee's Healthy School Lunches Campaign is found

at http://www.healthyschoollunches.org/ " >www.HealthySchoolLunches.org

>

> Please help me: what is this major thing against milk on this

> list--aside from lactose intolerance (which I developed after the

> DS)? Is it just the sugar in milk? Or, is it something else that I

> am missing? If it is just the sugar, I'll take that hit (with the

> DS, there is no dumping), of course, using Lactaid milk.

>

> Thanks for the enlightenment,

>

> Steve

[Guest guest]

Sorry about the repost....I get digest, and didn't realize had already

posted this.

Regards~

´¨¨)) -:¦:-

¸.·´ .·´¨¨))

((¸¸.·´ ..·´ -:¦:- Jacque

-:¦:- ((¸¸.·´*

www.jacquemiller.gasupusa.com

Discount Gasoline! Save 21%

with a Costco-like membership!

Ask me how!

[Guest guest]

Beth, thank you so much for telling me this. It has calmed my fears quite a

bit. Now, that's not to say it is the " Last Supper " syndrome, but at least

it is a possibility. I had told myself to really protein-load before

surgery, but I haven't yet. But, today is the day! I got on the scale this

morning, and it said 169 (up from 164 a week ago)....big Red Flag!!! I won't

be doing only the shakes, but mostly, and I've already taped up little pieces

of paper with " PROTEIN " written on them all over the hot spots (fridge,

computer, kitchen counter, etc.) LOL Now, hopefully, I can't tell myself I

forgot.

in NJ

open RNY 8/99

306/169 (was 164)/whatever

abdominoplasty & butt lipo 11/19/02

**********************************

In a message dated 11/9/2002 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, BethVBG

writes:

,

>

> I experienced that to a degree. I think I was back into the " Last

> Supper " mode that I went through prior to my WLS. I'm one week post op

> tummy tuck right now, and the junk has stopped calling my name to a large

> degree. Of course, it may have to do with the fact that I'm throwing major

> protein supplements at the body since the surgery. I find that I'm

> actually CRAVING my ProScore these days!

[Guest guest]

Beth, thank you so much for telling me this. It has calmed my fears quite a

bit. Now, that's not to say it is the " Last Supper " syndrome, but at least

it is a possibility. I had told myself to really protein-load before

surgery, but I haven't yet. But, today is the day! I got on the scale this

morning, and it said 169 (up from 164 a week ago)....big Red Flag!!! I won't

be doing only the shakes, but mostly, and I've already taped up little pieces

of paper with " PROTEIN " written on them all over the hot spots (fridge,

computer, kitchen counter, etc.) LOL Now, hopefully, I can't tell myself I

forgot.

in NJ

open RNY 8/99

306/169 (was 164)/whatever

abdominoplasty & butt lipo 11/19/02

**********************************

In a message dated 11/9/2002 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, BethVBG

writes:

,

>

> I experienced that to a degree. I think I was back into the " Last

> Supper " mode that I went through prior to my WLS. I'm one week post op

> tummy tuck right now, and the junk has stopped calling my name to a large

> degree. Of course, it may have to do with the fact that I'm throwing major

> protein supplements at the body since the surgery. I find that I'm

> actually CRAVING my ProScore these days!

[Guest guest]

Beth, thank you so much for telling me this. It has calmed my fears quite a

bit. Now, that's not to say it is the " Last Supper " syndrome, but at least

it is a possibility. I had told myself to really protein-load before

surgery, but I haven't yet. But, today is the day! I got on the scale this

morning, and it said 169 (up from 164 a week ago)....big Red Flag!!! I won't

be doing only the shakes, but mostly, and I've already taped up little pieces

of paper with " PROTEIN " written on them all over the hot spots (fridge,

computer, kitchen counter, etc.) LOL Now, hopefully, I can't tell myself I

forgot.

in NJ

open RNY 8/99

306/169 (was 164)/whatever

abdominoplasty & butt lipo 11/19/02

**********************************

In a message dated 11/9/2002 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, BethVBG

writes:

,

>

> I experienced that to a degree. I think I was back into the " Last

> Supper " mode that I went through prior to my WLS. I'm one week post op

> tummy tuck right now, and the junk has stopped calling my name to a large

> degree. Of course, it may have to do with the fact that I'm throwing major

> protein supplements at the body since the surgery. I find that I'm

> actually CRAVING my ProScore these days!