Re: How to discourage a convert

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:25:43 +0000 (UTC),
real-not-anti-spam-address@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (D.M. Procida) wrote:

mm <NOPSAMmm2005@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Herman Rubin <hrubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The lactose is rarely listed amongst the ingredients in these products.

I have found it listed in pills, but I doubt the amount
is enough to cause problems. Whey is usually listed.

<http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales-news/tm_headline=so-is-milk-
really-good-for-you-&method=full&objectid=18967695&siteid=50082-name_pag
e.html>

I have to wonder about this website:

It's a low-rent news website. What exactly did you expect?

One without mistakes so obvious that I would notice them.

If milk had proved harmful to health, these genetic changes would have
been bred out of humans. The implication is that milk must be beneficial
to our health.

No. The implication is that milk is not harmful to health. Doesn't
he understand there is something in between harmful and beneficial?
Does he somehow imagine we wouldn't drink it if it weren't good for
us? Other things people eat and drink and inject and snort put the
kibosh on that notion.

Peter Elwood is an epidemiologist of international renown, and you are
not. I think he probably has the conceptual framework for all this
pretty safely wrapped up, even if an article in the _Western Mail_
doesn't quite succeed in capturing it.

That might well be. That is why I blamed the website and not him. I
think the odds are that it is the website's effort to paraphrase him.

Every cow should have a health warning, says Professor Tony Campbell, a
medical biochemist

CERTAINLY milk contains good things for healthy living - protein,
vitamins, calcium and so on.

But milk also contains lactose - a unique ingredient that can be harmful.

There's an enzyme called lactate in the small intestine that breaks it

I think the only enzyme that does this is called lactase, not lactate.
I don't see how I can trust the rest of the url.

Trust? It's a piece from the popular press attempting to summarise a
debate between two academic medical researchers. I hope you didn't think
that you might want to rely on such a thing for guidance on health.

Yes, trust. Trust it to at least get straight what they have been
told or what they read by the people they quote. What is the point
of interviewing or quoting an epidemiologist of world renown if they
don't quote him accurately? And if they made mistakes that I notice,
who knows how many others that I don't know enough to notice.

I hope this isn't hosted by a friend of yours. If it is hosted by you
yourself, I think you should have said that. If it is neither, please
don't take my criticism so seriously.

The facts seem to be:

* milk is very beneficial to the health of some genetic
populations
* others, including many Jews, are lactose-intolerant, some
severely so
* lactose is present in many products, and often not listed as an
ingredient
* the quantities of hidden lactose in some products, including
pills, are sufficient to cause adverse health affects in some
individuals

In other words, Jews who are living amongst larger populations of
largely northern European origin are living in a society in which the
effects of milk consumption (and the ubiquitous presence of lactose in
products) are taken to be anything from very good to perfectly harmless
- and this might not be true for the minority genetic populations in
that society.

Daniele

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How to discourage a convert
    ... The implication is that milk is not harmful to health. ... But milk also contains lactose - a unique ingredient that can be harmful. ... Jews who are living amongst larger populations of ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Onset of lactose intolerance
    ... > Talking with a friend the other night about lactose intolerance. ... humans can cope with milk fine. ... In those populations which aren't lactose-tolerant ... > Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Why Did Humans Start Drinking Milk?
    ... have far fewer lactose-intolerant cats. ... milk, resulting in a majority of lactose-intolerant cats. ... purified or synthetic lactose equal to the amount of one cup of milk ... How many and to what degree do each of the populations become ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: How to discourage a convert
    ... people who don't want to eat meat with milk! ... As far as the health implications of lactose in pills are concerned, ... If milk had proved harmful to health, these genetic changes would have been bred out of humans. ... The implication is that milk is not harmful to health. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Calcium and Magnesium question - OT
    ... Some dairy products can be high in fat, but there are plenty of lower-fat options you can choose, or you could have just a small amount of the high-fat varieties. ... cottage cheese, low-fat cream cheese and reduced-fat versions of hard cheeses such as Cheddar, Cheshire and Edam ... No. Lactose intolerance is lactose intolerance. ... Many people who have self-diagnosed themselves as lactose intolerant are merely unable to drink cow's milk. ...
    (uk.people.support.depression)
Loading