Too much to avoid make my life boring...so you don't eat Mcdonald for whole life? and refuse to make friend that always eat junk food? LOL then your mental is not healthy, food obsessing you. Just improve health with plenty of vegetables, fruits and other natural food. Even fruits, vegetables, meat, bean are mostly man-made. Supplement are worst, really artificial stuff. I can't afford organic products because it's so expensive, so i just eat the cheaper one. You want real health? Go to villages and farm yourself!

LOL

and you're replying to a thread 2 years ago. so much for mental health

are you one of them?

So much complete and utter nonsense on this thread...

Its late and I got to sleep. I'll come here tomorrow and straighten out this mess.

What's going on in this thread?

When I tried HL milk I had to spit it out. Milk in Malaysia and southeast Asia generally tastes really weird to me.

Milk is healthy, though. Keep drinking.

It had this vanilla taste in the HL,doesn't it

yeah, it does. I have no idea why they make it like that

I can tolerate it though,even seems pretty nice

Page 1

>> From Armchair Science, London (April 1938)

◘ Hey OP, in case you haven't noticed the year is now 2011. You're posting a study from The Year of Her Majesty, 1938, and trying to prove that milk is dangerous? What's wrong, you couldn't find any studies published AFTER the advent of colour television that agreed with this?

>> There is no substitute for clean, raw milk as a food, so far as children are concerned.

◘ Right. Because whatever disease or parasites the cow had, I want to make sure my children also have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_milk

From the link:

-----
The recognition of many potentially deadly pathogens, such as E. Coli O157:H7, Listeria, and Salmonella, and their presence in milk products has led to the continuation of pasteurization. The Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and other health agencies of the United States strongly recommend that the public does not consume raw milk or raw milk products[3]. Young children, the elderly, people with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women are particularly susceptible to infections originating in raw milk[4].
-----

>> If we are to believe the protagonists of the Pasteurization-of-all-milk-at-all costs Party, raw milk is as good, or rather as bad, as rat poison-although as the Minister of Agriculture recently stated, "the human race existed long before Pasteur was heard of."

◘ And people lived just fine before antibiotics were invented.

And people lived just fine before seat belts were invented.

And people lived just fine before (insert life saving procedure/precaution here) was invented.

Of course the average life span of a person back then was only about half of what it is now. Wanna live to the ripe old age of 35? Drink raw milk!

>> This would mean installation of expensive machinery by every supplier, and if it should become compulsory there is little doubt that many small firms would shut down and the business pass in the hands of a few big dealers.

◘ It's been like 80 years... how'd that whole small firms thing play out?

>> If we are to be compelled to drink pasteurized milk, we should at least understand what pasteurization means. It set out to accomplish two things: Destruction of certain disease-carrying germs and the prevention of souring milk. These results are obtained by keeping the milk at a temperature of 145 degrees to 150 degrees F. for half an hour, at least, and then reducing the temperature to not more than 55 degrees F.

◘ Hey Flintstone, these days its just a few seconds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteurization

>> It is undoubtedly beneficial to destroy dangerous germs, but pasteurization does more than this-it kills off harmless and useful germs alike, and by subjecting the milk to high temperatures, destroys some nutritious constituents.

◘ No it doesn't. It's only heated for around 20 seconds or so. Of course you've obviously traveled here in a time machine from Buckingham Palace, so I dont blame you for not knowing.

>> With regards to the prevention of souring; sour raw milk is very widely used. It is given to invalids, being easily digested, laxative in its properties, and not unpleasant to take. But, after pasteurization, the lactic acid bacilli are killed. The milk, in consequence, cannot become sour and quickly decomposes, while undesirable germs multiply very quickly.

◘ The person who wrote this study needs to go play in traffic.

>> Recent figures published regarding the spread of tuberculosis by milk show, among other facts, that over a period of five years, during which time 70 children belonging to a special organization received a pint of raw milk daily. One case only of the disease occurred. During a similar period when pasteurized milk had been given, 14 cases were reported.

◘ Nevermind the obvious cherry picking of studies... TB is transmitted by lots of things other than milk. If you have TB and then cough on someone, they get TB. As such it's pretty easy to visit a place where a TB outbreak is occurring, look at the milk they're drinking, and say "AHA!!!"
Of course these days we dont have TB in the west. Medications exists that have removed it from public concern.

>> Milk has acquired a bad reputation. Many are intolerant or even allergic to milk, yet it seems that not milk itself may be to blame but the way we treat milk, "sanitizing" it by pasteurization, making it more durable by homogenization. Both these processes alter the chemical and physical properties of milk and make it less nutritious, harder to digest, and some say - even dangerous to our health.

◘ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk#Creaming..._homogenization - homogenization does nothing to alter the nutrition content of milk.

>> HOMOGENISED MILK COULD KILL

◘ OH LAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWDY!!! WHAT IS WE GONNA DO!!!!!!

http://lolcat.com/pics/scaredkitty.jpg

>> For more than 20 years Kurt A. Oster, MD, chief of cardiology emeritus at Park City Hospital, Bridgeport, Connecticut, has gathered evidence that provides a conclusive biochemical explanation for atherosclerosis (a form of arteriosclerosis, plaque clogging arteries). The culprit turns out to be the process of homogenisation, introduced to the dairy industry in 1932 as a means of improving marketing for products.

◘ again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk#Creaming..._homogenization

From the link:

-----
Kurt A. Oster, M.D., who worked during the 1960s through the 1980s, suggested a link between homogenized milk and arterosclerosis, due to damage to plasmalogen resulting from the release of bovine xanthine oxidase (BXO) from the milk fat globular membrane (MFGM) during homogenization. Oster's hypothesis has been widely criticized, however, and has not been generally accepted by the scientific community. No link has been found between arterosclerosis and milk consumption.[35]
-----

It's rare that I can refute a claim so absolutely and directly. You clearly did not do even 2 minutes of research on this topic.

>> Homogenisation merely prevents the cream from separating from the milk. This is primarily cosmetic. It does nothing to enhance the quality of the milk.

◘ Um, yes it does. The milk tastes better. Taste is part of the milks overall "quality".

>> But according to Dr. Oster's findings, it does a great deal to improve marketability - at the expense of human life.

◘ http://x7f.xanga.com/79982a5571418208471112/z162342801.jpg

>> Homogenisation causes the fat globules in whole milk to be fragmented into tiny, tight molecules that will not regroup. Not only do these intense molecules of fat refuse to regroup, they also resist digestion and manage to enter the bloodstream unaltered -which is one reason why so many people are allergic to milk.

◘ That is not why people are allergic to milk.

http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...by-prof_30.html

From the link:

-----
Also, an "allergy" is a disorder of the immune system in which a hypersensitive inflamation reaction happens to a particular substance. The inability to digest milk is not an allergy, and neither are any of the symptoms caused by lactose intolerance. It's simply the inability to produce lactase (an enzyme made by the liver that digests milk)
-----

>> In Rachel Carson's classic book "Silent Spring" the author warned us of the dangers of man-made pesticides. Rachel described how chemicals contaminate our environment and also accumulate in our bodies. Since then studies of human breast milk and body fat have confirmed her writings.

◘ links or it didn't happen.

>> Human beings in such remote areas as Canada's far northern Baffin Island now carry traces of persistent chemicals in their bodies, including such notorious compounds as PCB's, DDT and dioxin Even worse, in the womb through breast milk, mothers pass this chemical legacy on to the next generation.

◘ So they looked and looked and found the one place on earth where probably a biochemical spill occurred just weeks before - then tested the population and WELL WHADYA KNOW they ingested some pesticides?

Because if this were true you'd have to explain why none of us, right now, can go to the doctor and get a blood report showing pesticides in us.

>> After doing animal and human studies research scientists now link our exposure to man-made chemicals as having the following effects - low sperm count, infertility, hormonally triggered human cancers such as those of the breast and prostate gland, neurological disorders in children such as hyperactivity and deficits in attention and reproductive problems in wildlife

◘ You mean like this? http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...g-research.html

From the link:

-----
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194824 -

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the association between dietary dairy intake and teenaged acne among boys.

METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study. We studied 4273 boys, members of a prospective cohort study of youths and of lifestyle factors, who reported dietary intake on up to 3 food frequency questionnaires from 1996 to 1998 and teenaged acne in 1999. We computed multivariate prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals for acne.

RESULTS: After adjusting for age at baseline, height, and energy intake, the multivariate prevalence ratios (95% confidence interval; P value for test of trend) for acne comparing highest (>2 servings/d) with lowest (<1/wk)>

LIMITATIONS: Not all members of the cohort responded to the questionnaire. Acne assessment was by self-report and boys whose symptoms might have been part of an underlying disorder were not excluded. We did not adjust for steroid use and other lifestyle factors that may affect occurrence of acne.

CONCLUSION: We found a positive association between intake of skim milk and acne. This finding suggests that skim milk contains hormonal constituents, or factors that influence endogenous hormones, in sufficient quantities to have biological effects in consumers.

◘ The conclusions are completely fallacious. This is the kind of BAD information you stay on the look out for by reading each and every study carefully. Why is it bad?

First, because all the study did was find a positive association between milk and acne. There could be any one of a hundred reasons for that - it doesn't HAVE to be because the milk has hormones in it.

Second, did they run any tests on the milk to find if there were hormones in it? No. Did they run biopsies on the teenage boys to check for increased animal-hormones? No. What did they do? They had thousands of boys fill out a questionnaire. That's it. That's all they did. And from that... they conclude the milk has hormones, and THATS causing the acne. Ridiculous.
-----

^^^ There are plenty of bullshit studies out there like this.

>> THE FACTS ABOUT PASTEURISATION

>> Raw milk has good and bad bacteria. The good bacteria are an inbuilt inhibitor to the bad bacteria.

◘ http://www.absolutad.com/gallery/originals...t1_ranndino.jpg

>> Scientific investigations have shown that an anti cancer protective element is contained in raw milk but destroyed in pasteurisation.

◘ http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...ses-cancer.html

>> And calves will die if fed pasteurised milk as their normal diet. Pups and kittens grow much healthier if fed organic raw milk.

◘ Right, because we really ought to be eating what calves eat.

Seriously listen to what you're saying.

If it's not good for calves... then its not good for us.

.............. great. I'll run outside real quick and order a plate of grass.

---

Added on December 29, 2010, 10:28 pmStill page 1

>> This is nothing new. The whole thing is covered up by milk industry.

◘ Because it's a great big ol' conspiracy!!!

http://static.wix.com/media/395cb523711e81...aeb65a82.wix_mp

>> Milk is the only substance specifically designed and prepared by nature as food. In her wisdom, nature populated the planet with species of animals that could provide an abundance of this nourishing elixir for humans.

◘ First, "nature" is not a woman.

na·ture
   /ˈneɪtʃər/ [ney-cher]
–noun
1. the material world, esp. as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities.

2. the natural world as it exists without human beings or civilization.

3. the elements of the natural world, as mountains, trees, animals, or rivers.

Second, the planet was not populated with species designed to serve us. Animals evolved, adapting to the environment in which they lived, according to the laws of evolution.

>> Hippocrates, Galen and other ancient physicians used raw milk in the treatment of disease.

◘ Hippocrates.

Just...

God. F*ing. Dammit.

Because modern medicine TOTALLY CANT COMPETE with PRE. HISTORIC. TREATMENTS!!! These people did not even know what GERMS WERE TO BEGIN WITH!!! They also put leeches on you to suck out the disease which caused most of the patients to die. Come on if you got any dumber I'd have to water you twice a day.

>> As late as the 20th century,

◘ So anytime around 1900 AD.

>> modern physicians

◘ 100 years ago is modern?

>> prescribed the raw milk cure to their patients for treatment of most diseases.

◘ And did the raw milk cure any disease? No. Hence, we no longer prescribe it.

>> During the 1920's, Dr. J.E. Crewe of the Mayo Foundation used an exclusive diet of raw milk to cure

◘ "CURE"??? Don't you mean "treat" ?

>> Tuberculosis, high blood pressure, prostate disease, diabetes, kidney disease, chronic fatigue and obesity

◘ HE CURED OBESITY!!! With raw milk no less!!!!!

Ladies and gentlemen this is becoming truly laughable.

>> There have even been reports of people living for decades on nothing but raw milk.

◘ Oh well that proves it right there. Forget the veggies and veggies, forget lean meats, forget egg yolks... and dont even THINK about herbs, grains, nuts or berries. Someone once lived on nothing but raw milk. Therefore YOU SHOULD TOO!!!

>> How is it that a food that could sustain our ancestors around the world for thousands of years is now presenting health problems for modern man?

◘ Our ancestors only lived for like 30 years, genius.

http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_paragraphe/27...y_evolution.gif

You can even see the difference in developed nations over the last 100 years.

http://divisionoflabour.com/archives/life%20expectancy.JPG

>> Before the beginning of the practice of pasteurization in the late 1800's, milk allergies were not an issue.

◘ People were still lactose intolerant. Define "allergies".

And besides thats like saying "2000 years ago in ancient Israel when people were sick people tried to caste out the demons that were making them sick - germs were not an issue". Yea I wonder why.

I'll stop there. I'm not even going to try to refute the rest... it honestly reads like it was written by a student in junior high.

---

Added on December 29, 2010, 10:47 pmPage 2

I'm note sure its worth the effort to refute what 4rings said on page 2. It's clear he doesn't have a strong grasp on what constitutes as research, evidence, facts, proof, or the scientific method.

>> Ever since commercial milk was made available to public back in the early 1900, cardiovascular disease and other degenerative diseases were on the rise. Scientists then began to do their research and had since linked
pasteurized and homogenized milk as one of the source.

◘ Go to that "nothing causes cancer" link I posted earlier and read how "Linked To" means nothing.

>> Ever since I joined the complementary medicine industry

◘ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_medicine

From the link:

-----
In Western culture, the controversial term alternative medicine is any healing practice "that does not fall within the realm of conventional medicine",[1] or "that which has not been shown consistently to be effective."[2] It is often opposed to evidence based medicine and encompasses therapies with a historical or cultural, rather than a scientific, basis.
-----

>> and I have worked with many healthcare professionals, I learned more about the good and ugly side of food industry and the drug industry.

◘ surrreeeeee you have. Like how you found 1 or 2 papers written 70 years ago which were so easily refuted and think that it's evidence for something.

>> The food and drug industry are very 'dirty' just like politics. Money is the main culprit.

◘ http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/star4.../conspiracy.jpg

>> I know people who work in milk companies and they don't even consume their products.

◘ Maybe they just want a paycheck and dont personally like milk??? IS THAT POSSIBLE???!!

http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/c/...ommon_sense.jpg

>> My brother in law used to buy HL Milk for his kids. His kids always had flu and cold problems. His son had eczema.
A friend recommended raw milk to my brother in law and he decided to try. After a few months, he noticed his kids had better immune system (no more flu and cold) and also his son eczema had gone.

◘ http://www.perpetualocean.com/tetherdcow/c.../anecdotal2.jpg

@ iliveunderwater

>> U know what, as much as the research goes, the scientists could be wrong.

◘ http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...ong-part-1.html - I'm starting to post this link a lot. Everyone please read this one and part 2.

@ 4rings

>> Yeah you're rite. They are all wrong.

http://www.stumpo.net/images/bull.jpg

>> Fresh milk that is sold in the stores here are not fresh milk. I was told by Mat Sallehs.

◘ OH SHIT! The Mat Sallehs are in on the conspiracy!

http://www.operatorchan.org/trade/src/trad...0conspiracy.jpg

>> I am not sure about lactose intolerance. Commercial milk regardless of liquid or powder form is lacking in enzymes that help to digest the lactose due to pasteurization process that destroyed it

◘ Will you AT LEAST research what lactose intolerance is and what its caused by first??? No milk has in it all the enzymes needed to digest it, raw or otherwise. Some humans possess a mutated gene that allows them to keep producing lactase (the enzyme in question) long after they've grown into adults. Most people do not have this enzyme and are thus lactose intolerant.

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestor...30254526326.jpg

>> i saw it somewhere that cow's milk can increase the chance to get prostate cancer

◘ Read my cancer link posted earlier plzkthx

---

Added on December 29, 2010, 10:57 pmPage 3

@ StrikeZ

>> Actually I don't think that theres food thats 100% healthy for our body ... Everything has pros and cons .. I think it applies to food too.

◘ No, most food is good for you. There is very little food that is definitively "bad" for you. Also there is no such thing as "junk food".

@ Polaris

>> I've been hinting about this for ages, but it this is but a drop in the vast ocean of billiooooooooooon dollar pro-milk marketing.

>> You might as well become a doctor, and reap the rich rewards of sick people coming to you for a pill, a cut or a dose of chemo to cure them of years and years of milk consumption. These people are everywhere (greedy docs and ignorant patients).

◘ http://www.thadguy.com/wp-content/uploads/...cy-theorist.png

This is really getting silly gaiz.

@ darklight79 (whom I normally would never correct on anything)

>> And redline666, nothing can emulate or even come close to the anabolic properties of steroids. But the risks are simply not worth it.

◘ How about scientific training? You'd be surprised how many bodybuilder-wannabes there are out there dosing themselves on truck loads of steroids only to look slightly-better-than-average.

---

Added on December 29, 2010, 11:16 pmPage 4

@ Avocado

>> Hello, is Nespray & other milk powders considered raw or pasteurized milk?

>> Where can I get Raw Milk, other than the Farm?

>> Is our local Milk safe?

◘ I just love how people are getting scared and worried now to take something that's perfectly harmless for them. Milk is healthy, and now people are getting scared to take it.

GOOD JOB 4RINGS!!! Hey next we'll do a post on how exercise gives you cancer and post a study from the 1780s ok? We'll see how many people we can scare and confuse over something like regular moderate exercise.

@ Jaroque

>> gawd! i never knew all of this...I have been drinking HL milk like mad because i cannot afford Whey T_T

>> Meaning all milk is dangerous right now? @_@"

◘ See?

@ 4rings

>> Milk protein is mainly casein. Casein clogs in our guts for hours. Casein is one of the main cause of milk protein allergy.

◘ uuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/at_first_but_then.jpg

@ Polaris

>> Most people do not realize whey protein's humble origins. Originally, whey was a by-product of cheese production. Cheese is mostly fat and casein. In the cheese making process, whey was a left over by-product, and it was simply poured down the drain. Now, that was some time ago - back then, the manufacturers thought, wouldn't it be nice if we could find a way to sell the waste and make some money out of it. And the stuff was cheap as could be. Maybe they thought, "we'll sell it to bodybuilders! They'll eat (believe) anything." And the rest is history.

◘ Do you guys ever post anything that is NOT complete and utter fail?

Whey protein today is not the same as the whey protein you're referring to that was poured down the drain. Are you honestly suggesting whey protein is useless?

I'll admit that it's not superior to most other food proteins by any seriously wide margin, but you're speaking as though it's completely worthless.

Really, can you guys just not fail for at least once in this thread?

@ MalaysianPotatoe

>> The point of the article was to point out the benefits of raw milk, not to say that pasteurized milk was bad.

◘ No, that WAS the point of the article. Go back and read it again.

@ 4rings

>> No problem felixlhy. I was just trying to share some info. Nutrition is like religion. Either you believe or you don't.

◘ How. Much. More of this. Can I take.

http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...s-industry.html Nutrition is not a religion. It is a science. Where do you come UP with this?

>> The first research was done in the early 1900. It still stands until today.
>> There are hundreds of clinical studies done since the 1st until now.

◘ POST 2 OF THEM!!!!!!!

>> You may check from the medical journal.

◘ WHICH medical journal???

>> I have forgotten the website.

◘ Oh how convenient. ('-' )

>> Dairy industry is a billion dollar industry. It is well supported by the government in their respective countries.

◘ Supported by the government how??? Do you know how private industry works???

>> Not all whey proteins are created equal. Whey proteins are very complex.

◘ http://kaseybrownfitness.blogspot.com/2010...in-powders.html

I am so glad I wrote that blog...

@ felixlhy

((You posted a study))

>> Whey, a protein complex derived from milk, is being touted as a functional food with a number of health benefits. The biological components of whey, including lactoferrin, beta-lactoglobulin, alpha-lactalbumin, glycomacropeptide, and immunoglobulins, demonstrate a range of immune-enhancing properties. In addition, whey has the ability to act as an antioxidant, antihypertensive, antitumor, hypolipidemic, antiviral, antibacterial, and chelating agent. The primary mechanism by which whey is thought to exert its effects is by intracellular conversion of the amino acid cysteine to glutathione, a potent intracellular antioxidant.

◘ Felix... all protein does this, not just whey protein. All protein breaks down into amino acids, and all complete proteins will have cysteine and glutathione.

---

Added on December 29, 2010, 11:28 pmPage 5

Polaris is at least beginning to do at least a somewhat respectable job at presenting evidence for his/her agenda, but the fact remains that the scientific community at large does not recognize any problem with drinking milk, or any "links to cancer". Again see my "nothing causes cancer" post.

I'm sure if I actually took the time to look into some of these claims I would essentially spend hours ripping them apart line-by-line as I've done in this thread.

There aren't any "facts" that show there's anything inherently bad about milk consumption. I see 2 people, 4rings and Polaris, going on and on about the "facts".

Post the facts here. Show me the actual studies and I'll show you how they are completely fallacious, just as the example study I posted earlier in this thread.

This post has been edited by Kasey Brown: Dec 30 2010, 06:30 AM

LOLZ
Don't know why some people keep doing that.

...
so much text about milk


tl;dr

ARRRRGH!!!

Ok... tl;dr - raw milk IS bad for you, pasturized milk IS NOT bad for you, and you should drink more pasturized milk.

Thanks for the helpful tips

i drink HL milk b4 i sleep~ Yum Yum~

I've got 6 cartons in my fridge right now. Grabbed as much as I can while it's still at RM4.99. Otherwise it's gonna be like RM5.50-5.90 like that.

I dun really understand why anybody must get into an argument over things like this. It's really up to U. Nobody lives forever & with the world we live in now, we dun really have much of a choice. Those who want to drink it then drink la, those who dun wan then dun drink la, whts the big deal ? Maybe some of us here can stand right in front of the dairy section in every supermarket & chase away everybody who wants to buy HL milk... boy, tht's gonna get in the news really quick... not to mention YouTube..

^^^ While I understand what you're saying... we can't stand around and let people be mislead by wrong information either. There's a mountain of pure garbage being pushed around as fact and people are constanty getting mislead. Really, some people in this thread were actually SCARED to drink milk of all things!!! When you know what's right, it comes natural that you want to help guide others away from what's wrong.

Thats why I started my blog... I thought it would be a way to reach a wider audience and help destroy the fitness and nutrition myths going around.

Then someone told me about the lowyat forums... and now I probably post more here than I do on the blog.

No longer go for HL... its too artificial already... i'm in love with farmhouse lol.

I am one those so-called 'lactose intolerant' folk. However, I've started drinking raw milk from a dairy near where I live. I turn most of it into yoghurt, but some of it I put into my hot chocolate after warming it up a bit (no boiling). So far no issues.

Lactose intolerance is a result of the body's inability to digest milk sugar, lactose. Yoghurt is OK for many people because the lactose there is already partially broken down. If you drink raw milk, enzymes present in the milk (which is destroyed by the process of pasteurisation) help break down the lactose, hence lactose intolerance is no longer an issue.

I would urge everyone to try raw milk. It tastes a damn sight better than any processed stuff, and it doesn't present you with as many issues as pasteurised, homogenised milk. Of course, you still have to deal with the issue of growth hormones, antibiotics, and all the other issues inherent in consuming animal protein.