 |
|
|
Willothewisp.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Facility Of Dairy Products
 “It is a common misconception that dairy products are good for us”
In humans our physiology was never designed to consume milk after three years of age, and it is most emphatically not arranged to deal with cows milks. Up until three years of age we certainly can have milk, our mother’s, or for that matter the breast milk of any lactating woman but we were are not physiologically set up to digest cow’s milk. This might come as a surprise to most people, given how far dairy products pervade our super markets and stores. If you really want to play it safe, you may decide to join the growing number of Europeans who are eliminating dairy products from their diets altogether, often due to dairy product allergies and intolerances. Although this sounds radical to those of us weaned on milk and the five basic food groups, it is eminently sensible. Of all the mammals, only humans, and then principally Caucasians, continue to drink milk beyond babyhood.
If we look back to the bony remains of our Paleolithic there is no doubt whatever that these skeletal remains reflect great strength, muscularity, and total absence of advanced osteoporosis. You may feel that these people are not important for us to study but consider that today our genes are programming our bodies in almost exactly the same way as our ancestors of 60,000 to 100,000 years ago. Why are these ancestors import in this context ? Well they had no dairy herds, next to no dairy animals at all, and yet despite this lack of a supply of milk they suffered no calcium deficiencies. If the lack of one of the five major foods groups then was no problem for humans why should we be told it is a problem now ?
All Milks Are Not Created Equal
All milks are simply not the same. The milk of every species of mammal is unique and specifically tailored to the requirements of that animal. For example, cows' milk is very much richer in protein than human milk. Three to four times as much and it has five to seven times the mineral content. However, it is markedly deficient in essential fatty acids when compared to human mothers' milk. Mothers' milk has six to ten times as much of the essential fatty acids, especially linoleic acid. Cow's milk has no linoleic acid. It simply is not designed for humans. Biochemists and physiologists, but rarely medical doctors, are gradually learning that foods contain the crucial elements that allow a particular species to develop its unique specialization, cow’s milk should be an occasional treat for humans, not a corner stone of our diets.
How About A nice Cold Glass Of Synthetic Hormones?
Sixty years ago an average cow produced 1500 litres of milk per year. Today the top producers give TWENTY FIVE times that much ! Just how is this accomplished?
It is done by pumping drugs, antibiotics, and worst of all – hormones into them, and then force feeding the poor beasts. The worrying thing about the use of anti-biotics and hormones is that these are persistent agents and as such they find their way into our bodies via the milk. Another effect is that cows also urinate these drugs out of their bodies and onto the ground where they eventually work their way into the ground water and from there into our water supplies, as water treatment works are not obliged to filter out these substances.
The most disgusting of the hormones used is bovine growth hormone or BGH. It is banned in Europe despite considerable pressure from the USA to allow it’s sale here, but sadly for the American people the FDA allowed it’s use, once again the FDA is doing it’s usual bang-up job of protecting the American public. This genetically engineered drug is supposed to stimulate milk production but, according to Monsanto (funny how that name turns up every time when we talk about the poisoning of our food chain), the hormone's manufacturer, does not affect the milk or meat. There are three other manufacturers: Upjohn, Eli Lilly, and merican Cyanamid Company. To date there have been no long-term studies on the hormone's effect on the humans drinking the milk, these companies have effectively stifled and stomped out any such studies. Aside from problems this drug will be causing humans it also causes problems for the animals because it causes a marked increase (50 to 70 per cent) in mastitis. This condition then requires antibiotic therapy – which those companies also make and the residues of the antibiotics appear in the milk. All things considered you have to marvel at how those companies make a product that when used will automatically generate more revenue for it’s maker when the farmer has to buy yet another drug to combat the side effects of the first. We have not even considered here the morality of inflicting these things on the animals themselves.
How About A Nice Cold Glass Of Pus ?
that’s right, we did say PUS, the same stuff that oozes from infected wounds. The dairy industry knows that the way it goes about producing non-organic milk causes major problems. Accordingly, it has developed a system known as the “somatic cell count” to measure the amount of pus in milk. The somatic cell count is the standard used to gauge milk quality. The higher the somatic cell count, the more pus in the milk, the more pus you are pouring on your breakfast cereals. It is bad enough in Europe, but in the USA the situation is much worse.
In the USA any milk with a somatic cell count of higher than 200 million per liter should not enter the human food supply, according to the dairy industry. Therefore, anyone living in a state where the somatic cell count is higher than 200 million shouldn’t be drinking milk. There’s only one problem, every state but Hawaii is producing milk with pus levels so high that it shouldn’t enter the human food supply! Even the national average, at 322 million, is well above the industry’s limit.
One culprit causing the hundreds of millions of pus cells in every liter of milk is “bovine growth hormone,” the Monsanto chemical company’s growth hormone marketed as Posilac. Posilac is now widely used by dairy farmers to increase the amount of milk that their already overburdened cows produce. Because cows are not built to produce this much milk, they are prone to a painful udder infection called mastitis. When they are milked, pus and bacteria from the infection flow right along with the milk. The journal Nature reported that Posilac increases somatic cells in the milk by a whopping 19 percent! Researchers estimate that an ordinary glass of milk contains between one and seven drops of pus.. Pus can contain paratuberculosis bacteria, which are believed to cause Crohn’s disease in human beings, Crohn’s is another disease that it increasing in leaps and bounds.
Dairy farmers try to control the rampant mastitis with large doses of antibiotics, but these antibiotics also wind up in the milk and persist even after pasteurization. Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of too many antibiotics, which researchers believe can inhibit the development of the immune system. Dairy farmers don’t tell consumers that every glass of milk is contaminated with pus, bacteria, and perhaps with paratuberculosis. The only way to avoid drinking pus is to avoid cow’s milk.
As things stand in the USA today the limit is nearly twice what independent scientist are calling for. Seventeen states are producing milk that would be illegal to sell in Europe!
|
|
|
|
|
The Diseases in Cows Milk
Bovine leukemia virus is found in more than two out of five dairy cows in Europe and three of five in the United States! This involves about 80% of dairy herds. But then the milk is pooled, a very large
percentage of all milk produced is contaminated (90 to 95 %). Of course the virus is killed in pasteurization assuming the pasteurization was done correctly, and studies of milk processing plants suggests that incorrect pasteurization is by no means uncommon. What about unpasterised (raw) milk ? One lengthy study from Germany deplored the problem and admitted the impossibility of keeping the virus from infected cows' milk from the rest of the milk. Several European countries, including Germany and Switzerland, have attempted to cull the infected cows from their herds with rather limited success.
I am afraid the American people get an even worse deal. They have the worst record in the industrialized world, only beating Venezuela according to Virgil Hulse MD, a milk specialist who also has a B.S. in Dairy Manufacturing as well as a Master's degree in Public Health.
At a modern, large, milk processing plant an accidental cross connection between raw and pasteurized milk occurred and a violent salmonella outbreak followed, killing 4 and making an estimated 150,000 ill. How can the milk companies assure the people who drank this milk that they were not exposed to the ingestion of raw, and fully active bovine leukemia viruses? I ask this question because we all know that there are often clusters of leukemia cases that occur in some areas, could these be linked to failures in milk pasteurization allow Bovine leukemia to slip through?
If the bovine leukemia viruses causes human leukemia, we could expect the dairy states with known leukemic herds to have a higher incidence of human leukemia. This does in fact appear to be the case given evidence from at least 7 American states, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. In these areas veterinarians have higher rates of leukemia than the general public. Dairy farmers have significantly elevated leukemia rates. Recent research shows lymphocytes from milk fed to neonatal mammals gains access to bodily tissues by passing directly through the intestinal wall.
Norway undertook a study of 1422 individuals were followed for 11 and a half years. Those drinking 2 or more glasses of milk per day had 3.5 times the incidence of cancer of the lymphatic organs.
According to the British Med. Journal 61:456-9, March 1990. For most cancers there was no association between the tumour and milk ingestion. However, in lymphoma, there was a strong positive association. If one drank two glasses or more daily (or the equivalent in dairy products – butter, cheese etc), the odds were 3.4 times greater than in persons drinking less than one glass of developing a lymphoma.
Next we come to lung cancer and a curious quirk in the figures. The beverage habits of 569 lung cancer patients and 569 controls at Roswell Park USA were studied in the International Journal of Cancer, April 15, 1989. Persons drinking whole milk 3 or more times daily had a 2-fold increase in lung cancer risk when compared to those never drinking whole milk. What is particularly interesting is that for many years we have been watching the lung cancer rates for Japanese men who smoke far more than American or European men but who develop fewer lung cancers. Workers in this research area feel that the total fat intake is the difference.Diabetes & Dairy Foods
Type 2 diabetes is one of the great lies of allopathic (modern) medicine, it isn't technically a disease. It's just a metabolic side effect of a lifetime of consuming refined carbohydrates, added sugars (including the worst offender fructose from high fructose corn syrup), and avoiding physical exercise. Some doctors say diabetes is a disease that causes the destruction of insulin-producing cells in the pancreas. But that logic is completely backwards, even though it is the popular thinking about this so-called disease. The truth is that first the body attacks the beta cells in the pancreas, then the person gets diagnosed as having this inability to produce insulin, and that pattern of symptoms is given a label. That label is the word, 'diabetes.' Diabetes isn't the cause of the destruction of the beta cells in the pancreas. It is simply the name that is attached to these symptoms.
The next obvious question, then, is: what is the true cause of this autoimmune disorder? Why would the human body attack its own pancreas and destroy the beta cells that are responsible for keeping that person alive? Because without functioning beta cells in the pancreas, most human beings would quickly die without supplemental insulin.
The answer is something that's almost never talked about in the mainstream press: the consumption of dairy products (see our web page on this: http://www.willothewisp.org/DairyProducts.htm). One of the causes is cow's milk that confuses the body's immune system and makes it to think that the pancreas beta cells are in fact the enemy. The immune system then destroys those cells, resulting in a pattern of symptoms called 'type 1 diabetes.'
There is a strong correlation between the consumption of milk and dairy products and the development of type 1 diabetes. Certainly, there are other causes, but this is one of the more preventable causes of this disorder. The mechanism at work has to do with the milk proteins (casein, among others) that human bodies have difficulty digesting. The presence of these proteins confuses the immune system, causing it to attack its own cells.
Milk Benefits
When you understand the physiology involved it is difficult to see why we should be drinking bovine milk as part of our standard nutrition, but if you stretch it it you say it is for calcium and it's a source of amino acids (proteins).
Looking at the calcium first: we need calcium to build strong bones and protect us against osteoporosis. There is no doubt that milk is loaded with calcium. But is it a good calcium source ?
No, not really because excessive amounts of dairy products actually interfere with calcium absorption. Secondly, the excess of protein that the milk provides is a major cause of the osteoporosis problem – what you gain with one hand you then loose with the other. A doctor in the UK has been writing for years about the geographical distribution of osteoporosis. It seems that the countries with the highest intake of dairy products are invariably the countries with the most osteoporosis. Numerous studies have shown that the level of calcium ingestion and especially calcium supplementation has no effect whatever on the development of osteoporosis. The most important such article appeared recently in the British Journal of Medicine where the long, and manipulating arm of the dairy industry
cannot reach to snuff out the research. Eskimos have an exceptionally high protein intake estimated at 25 percent of total calories. They also have a high calcium intake at 2,500 mg/day. Their osteoporosis is among the worst in the world. The other instructive group are the Bantus of South Africa. They have a 12 percent protein diet, mostly p lant protein, and only 200 to 350 mg/day of calcium, about half our women's intake. The women have virtually no osteoporosis despite bearing six or more children and nursing them for prolonged periods. Yet when African women immigrate to the United States they develop osteoporosis.
Our calcium does NOT come from milk – it is a LIE that it does, many people even lack a key enzyme involved in absorbing calcium from milk. We get it from exactly the same place the cow gets the calcium, from green things that grow in the ground, mainly from leafy vegetables. Have you noticed how elephants and rhinos develop their huge bones by eating green leafy plants. Do carnivorous animals pop to their local store for a carton of milk to build up their bones ? No of course not, in fact they do not eat leafy plants either. It seems that all of earth's mammals do well if they live in harmony with their genetic programming and natural food. Only humans living an affluent life, drink vast amounts of milk, guzzling packs of butter and cheese and yet STILL have rampant osteoporosis.
Still not convinced ? Think of the several billion humans on this earth, the vast majority of the population in fact, who have never seen cows' milk. Wouldn't you think osteoporosis would be prevalent in this huge group? They have far less than that seen in the countries where dairy products are commonly consumed. The truly significant determinants of osteoporosis are grossly excessive protein intakes and lack of weight bearing on long bones, both taking place over decades. Hormones play a secondary, but far from trivial role in women – see our pages on oestrogen dominance. Milk far from being good for bones actually depletes bones.
Conclusion
There is only one valid reason to drink milk or use milk products and that is just because we simply want to, for the pleasure of the food, but we should not treat it as a major food group. Putting dairy in it’s proper place would help our health, and help our planet by removing the vast and inefficient and polluting herds of dairy cattle.
Read our page on Breastfeeding
|
|
|
|
|
|
