Any carnivores here?

[9Lives]

I get my vitamins from other food sources as well..It's not like milk cancels them out or anything...Lactose intolerance i must say i have never met a person with lactose intolerance...and i know A LOT of people. Probably a pseudo disease..just like allergies are spreading like wildfire. More each years. And diabetes from milk..? Well im pretty sure milk is the very last cause in that list. Genetics play a big part in diabetes as well.

All i can say against milk..is that it kills the bacteria that rots the food in your stomach. Milk acid has antibacterial effects..And for those of us with heartburn..I have not found a more effective cure. Soda water just doesn't cut it for some reason. Maybe it's because milk is thicker and covers better.. (and my heartburn is not because of milk..it's because of binge drinking during my rock'n'roll years )

No need to ring the alarm bell...

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

Its silly and lazy.

this I disagree with completely.... you are making a HUGE assumption based on what? Nothing wrong with a child having a glass of milk with a meal...

but that is your opinion and I can respect you having your own opinion ... I disagree with it...

Peace~

Hippie Chic

Huge assumption? Not really. All one needs to do is look at how much milk is produced and consumed by adults. There is no need for adults to drink milk, cows milk at that. All the vitamins that milk contains are also found in most foods. So one could just eat a balanced diet and not drink milk and get more than enough vitamins and minerals from their food . But instead people drink milk, cuz it " helps you grow and think like a champ" but so does food. Milk is for babies , thats it. If it werent then women would lactate most of their lives. Since women lactate ti give milk to babaies. If we needed milk thru our adult lives women would lactate and we would drink that , but we dont.

You could replace that glass of milk with water and give your kid a balanced diet and they wouldnt miss milk a bit.





Nevermind

 

[9Lives]

But it tastes so good...

 

[Guest]

You could replace that glass of milk with water and give your kid a balanced diet and they wouldnt miss milk a bit.





Nevermind

LMAO you are assuming again..... did I say they drink only milk? or how much... I said nothing wrong with having milk with their meal and you assume they don't drink water any other time? As I have said many times... all things in moderation...


funny you scolded someone else for preaching and hmmmmmm

You have yourself a wonderful afternoon

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

I get my vitamins from other food sources as well..It's not like milk cancels them out or anything...Lactose intolerance i must say i have never met a person with lactose intolerance...and i know A LOT of people. Probably a pseudo disease..just like allergies are spreading like wildfire. More each years. And diabetes from milk..? Well im pretty sure milk is the very last cause in that list. Genetics play a big part in diabetes as well.

All i can say against milk..is that it kills the bacteria that rots the food in your stomach. Milk acid has antibacterial effects..And for those of us with heartburn..I have not found a more effective cure. Soda water just doesn't cut it for some reason. Maybe it's because milk is thicker and covers better.. (and my heartburn is not because of milk..it's because of binge drinking during my rock'n'roll years )

No need to ring the alarm bell...

A study of children in 40 countries found that the incidence of juvenile diabetes was directly related to diet: The higher the consumption of cow’s milk and other animal products, the greater the chance of developing diabetes. Conversely, children who consumed a largely vegetarian diet had a much lower incidence of diabetes.
–The American Journal of Nutrition
Muntoni et al., 71 (2000),1525-9

A study of more than 800 children found that feeding infants cow’s milk formula is "associated with an increased risk of type 1 diabetes ..."
–Diabetes Care
Hypponen et al., December 1999

In another study of 800 children, researchers found that the "introduction to cow’s milk products before age 8 is a risk factor" for juvenile diabetes and that breast-feeding babies for more than the first week after birth protected infants from developing diabetes.
–Diabetes Care
Gimeno et al., August 1997

In 1994, the American Academy of Pediatrics convened a panel to examine the issue, concluding that exposure to cow’s milk protein may indeed be an important factor in the development of diabetes. Based on the more than 90 studies that had addressed the issue, the academy reported that avoiding cow’s milk exposure might delay or prevent the disease in susceptible individuals.
–Pediatrics
American Academy of Pediatrics Work Group on Cow’s Milk Protein and Diabetes Mellitus, 1994

"The avoidance of cow’s milk protein for the first several months of life may reduce the later development of IDDM (insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus) in susceptible individuals. … In families with a strong history of IDDM, particularly if a sibling has diabetes, breast-feeding and avoidance of commercially available cow’s milk and products containing intact cow’s milk protein during the first year of life are strongly encouraged."
–Pediatrics
American Academy of Pediatrics, November 1994

"The National Dairy Board’s slogan, ‘Milk. It does a body good,’ sounds a little hollow these days … [because of] evidence that early exposure to a protein in cow’s milk may sometimes lead to juvenile diabetes."
–Scientific American
October 1992


As far as lactose intolerence?

is the condition in which lactase, an enzyme needed for proper metabolization of lactose (a sugar that is a constituent of milk and other dairy products), is not produced in adulthood. A lactose tolerance test, a hydrogen breath test, or a stool acidity test is required for a clinical diagnosis.[2]

With lactose intolerance, the result of consuming too much lactose is excess gas production, stomach aches and often diarrhea. Most lactose-intolerant adults can drink about 250 ml (8 oz) of milk per day without severe symptoms (McGee 2004; Swagerty et al, 2002).[2]

The majority of humans stop producing significant amounts of lactase sometime between the ages of two and five. A relatively recent genetic change caused some populations, including many northern Europeans, to continue producing lactase into adulthood. Lactose intolerance is an autosomal recessive trait, while lactase-persistence is the dominant allele. The gene is expressed and the enzyme synthesized if at least one of the two genes are able to express properly. Only when both gene expressions are affected is lactase enzyme synthesis reduced, which in turn reduces lactose digestion. [3]


Humans aint supposed to drink milk past infancy which is why we have a trait in our genes that makes us stop producing latase between 2-5. Problem is people dont know any better and keep feeding kids milk and in turn some people have mutated their genes thru years of milk feeding to kep producing it. But we were made not to drink milk past infancy



The gene mutation thing after years of milk drinking shows its bad for us. Its like knowing that banging your head on a wall hurts but you keep doing it till you develop a callus on your forehead, then thinking its good for you






Nevermind

 

[9Lives]

''in susceptible individuals''

wow..George Plimpton would like you...

What about Probiotic milk acid bacteria ?

But what am i ranting about..i smoke cigarettes like a chimney..im good as dead anyway..lol

 

[Guest]

But what am i ranting about..i smoke cigarettes like a chimney..im good as dead anyway..lol

LOL

 

[genkisan]

Humans aint supposed to drink milk past infancy which is why we have a trait in our genes that makes us stop producing latase between 2-5. Problem is people dont know any better and keep feeding kids milk and in turn some people have mutated their genes thru years of milk feeding to kep producing it. But we were made not to drink milk past infancy






Nevermind

And no matter how you look at human evolution and paleo-diet, we were not meant to eat over-fattened, under-exercised, synthetically fed hormone and anti-biotic pumped meat either......but that doesn't seem to stop you.....

its laziness. most people take the easy way out.

Guess that above quote doesn't apply to you, eh?
(insert sarcasm here)

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

And no matter how you look at human evolution and paleo-diet, we were not meant to eat over-fattened, under-exercised, synthetically fed hormone and anti-biotic pumped meat either......but that doesn't seem to stop you.....





Guess that above quote doesn't apply to you, eh?
(insert sarcasm here)

Well if it isnt everyone favorite environmentalist trying to stop pollution while driving his protege. That whole wild meat versus farm meat thing is your deal. Im talking about a gene in our body that makes us stop having the ability to digest milk. As far as meat. I eat it. i go to the store and buy it wherei get the rest of my food. forgive me for not getting a gun and trekking thru the woods , but inthe woods around here we dont have cows roaming the wild.





Nevermind

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

LMAO you are assuming again..... did I say they drink only milk? or how much... I said nothing wrong with having milk with their meal and you assume they don't drink water any other time? As I have said many times... all things in moderation...


funny you scolded someone else for preaching and hmmmmmm

You have yourself a wonderful afternoon

Im not assuming anything, calm down. we can have a rational debate without ruffling feathers. I never commented on them only drinking milk, what i did comment on was you saying there is nothing wrong with kids having a glass of milk with dinner . All i meant was that milk can be replaced with other food and the benafits of milk wouldnt be missed. so while there is nothing worng wiht it as you say, there is nothing right with it as well. Its not liek milk has some secret ingrediant we cant find in any other food. Which is why animals stop drinking it and go get food. But humans dont, eventhough are bodies are made to do so.



Nevermind

 

[Guest]

All i meant was that milk can be replaced with other food and the benafits of milk wouldnt be missed. Nevermind

Just as meat protein can be replaced with other things? Sorry I wont' debate someone who can't respect others opinions and attack as you have.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[genkisan]

Well if it isnt everyone favorite environmentalist trying to stop pollution while driving his protege. That whole wild meat versus farm meat thing is your deal. Im talking about a gene in our body that makes us stop having the ability to digest milk. As far as meat. I eat it. i go to the store and buy it wherei get the rest of my food. forgive me for not getting a gun and trekking thru the woods , but inthe woods around here we dont have cows roaming the wild.





Nevermind

Actually, I am not working this week, so I am not driving anything.

Hate to bust yer bubble Mr N, but you do not have to trek thru any woods to eat better and more moral meat....just shop at a different store that carries organic, or buy direct from a farm (in bulk, and pay about 1/3 retail price for your meat).

Besides which, your meat eating diet is just as wasteful of fossil fuels as my Protege...probably alot more:

Beef:
In April 2004 Dr. David Pimentel of Cornell University shared with me an advance copy of his paper Livestock Production and Energy Use, which says that it takes 40 kilocalories (kcal) of fossil energy to produce 1 kcal of beef protein. This number updates the 35:1 ratio published in his earlier book Food, Energy and Society (1996, with Marcia Pimentel). These numbers include only production, not processing, packaging, transport, refrigeration, etc. The numbers for potatoes below likewise are only for production, so we're comparing apples to apples. Of course, beef likely uses even more energy vs. potatoes than we calculate here, considering the extra energy required for refrigeration and safety protocols. Finally, note that these figures consider all forms of fossil energy, not just gasoline. This includes fossil-fuel-based fertilizers. With that long introduction, here is the calculation for the energy required for beef production:

* 40 kcal fossil energy per 1 kcal beef protein
* 40,000 kcal energy per 1000 kcal beef protein
* 40,000 kcal energy per 250 g beef protein
* 40,000 kcal energy per 1350 g beef (85% lean ground beef, raw, USDA database)
* 13,481 kcal energy per 455 g beef
* 13,481 kcal energy per 1 lb. beef
* 0.435 gallons of gasoline equivalent per 1 lb. beef (assumed 31,000 kcal per gallon; see below)

Note that there is some disagreement over the number of kilocalories in a gallon of gasoline. There are a few reasons for that. First of all, the kilocalorie is a measure of energy, but gasoline is not energy itself, it is a fuel that can be used to produce energy. Also, gasoline is not a static substance -- the quality of gasoline varies from one batch to the next depending on the source material, processing methods, etc. Here are the competing sources I found:
* 34,800 - Woodrow Wilson Biology Institute
* 32,143 - Prof. Joe Straley and S. A. Shafer, University of Kentucky
* 31,499 - Ken DeLong
* 31,000 - David Hershey, faculty, Washington University Medical School, and HowStuffWorks.com
* ~30,000 - Dr. David Pimentel, Cornell University
* 28,807 - (derived, see below)

I derived the 28,807 figure thusly: According to the EPA there are about 113,500 BTUs in a gallon of gasoline. (Vigan Prassar says it's 125,000, but the EPA's data appears more credible since it contains more detail.) One kcal is equivalent to 3.97 BTUs (Google calculator), so the 113,500 BTUs in a gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 28,807 kcal.

Though in Dr. Pimentel's earlier work he assigns a whopping 38,000 kcal per gallon, he confirmed for me in a telephone conversation on April 8, 2004 that ~30,000 is a better figure.

Potatoes: On p. 134-135 of Food, Energy and Society we see that the production of 34,384 kg of potatoes in New York required 152 litres of diesel, 272 litres of gasoline, and 47 kWh of electricity. This gives us:

* 152 litres of diesel = 40.15 gallons of diesel
* 272 litres of gas = 71.85 gallons of gas

* 47 kWh = 160,411 BTUs (1 kWh = 3413 btus)
* 160,411 BTUs = 1.41 gallons of gasoline (113,500 BTUs per gallon, as per EPA)
* Total energy = 40.15 + 71.85 + 1.41 = 113.4 gallons
* 34,384 kg potatoes = 75,804 lbs. potatoes
* 113.4 gallons / 75,804 lbs. = 0.0015 gallons of fossil energy per lb. of potatoes

Regarding the electrical energy used, most electricity in the U.S. is produced with fossil fuels.

When I spoke with Dr. Pimentel by telephone on April 8 to confirm my calculation above he said that I should double my result to include fossil-based fertilizers, so let's call it 0.0030 gallons.

Comparison: We thus have 0.435 gallons per lb. of beef vs. 0.003 gallons per lb. of potatoes. That means that beef requires 0.435 / 0.003 = 145 times as much fossil energy to produce as potatoes.

(2) Page 147 of Food, Energy and Society shows that it takes 35,000 kcal of fossil energy to produce 3500 kcal for a typical daily American diet, while it would take only 18,000 kcal to produce a pure vegetarian diet. 3500 kcal is rather high for a daily diet, so we'll assume 2500 kcal instead. With that figure it takes 12,857 extra kcal a day for the non-vegetarian diet, or 4,692,805 extra kcal per year. At 30,000 kcal per gallon of fuel that's an extra 156 gallons per year.

That's three gallons a week, per person.

That's 46 billion gallons of irreplacable hydrocarbons a year, in the US alone....so you can have a cheap steak.

If you really like meat so much Mr. N, and think it is so good for you....put yer money where your mouth is and buy non-factory farmed organic meat.....it tastes WAY better, is WAY better for you, and is not nearly as environmentally and morally reprehensible.

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

Just as meat protein can be replaced with other things? Sorry I wont' debate someone who can't respect others opinions and attack as you have.

Have a wonderful day.

Whom have i attacked?

Also our bodies can digest animal proteins naturally. But our bodies arent meant to digest milk past infancy , thats my point.

Also while meat protein can be supplemented with other sources of protein ( such as beans) there are things found in meat , creatine for example, that cannot be found in beans or legumes. Only in animal protein.

Where as the things found in milk can be found in other sources. The things found in meat cannot be found in anything other than meat.





Nevermind


Nevermind

 

[9Lives]

Also our bodies can digest animal proteins naturally. But our bodies arent meant to digest milk past infancy , thats my point.

What changes ? And how? And with your own words please...don't copy paste a page long study. It cant be much..so it must be possible to grasp this in a nutshell.

Btw Nevermind...what do you think about this article i found ? I had a sneaking suspicion it could be something along those lines..but i wont bet my nads on it..

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050603-123931-8194r.htm

Well if true then my flank is covered...Im a Northern European fellow..-30C winters and 3 shitty ass months of summer (mostly)..My ancestors we're farmers for as long as history cares to remember..Im telling you..this stuff flows through my veins..Addicted for life!

 

[Guest]

Also while meat protein can be supplemented with other sources of protein ( such as beans) there are things found in meat , creatine for example, that cannot be found in beans or legumes. Only in animal protein.

Even though vegetables do not contain creatine, vegetarians do not suffer from creatine deficiency. Creatine can be very beneficial for athletes, is why most will eat alot of meat...

I have said previously, I have a friend that is a vegetarian... she's very healthy and she happens to be a circus performer. Leanest, most muscular body I've ever seen.

I choose to disagree with you... no matter how much you tell me we need animal protein.. I disagree...... sorry... you won't change my mind.

You do make assumptions... saying people feeding their kids milk is silly and lazy...

I believe everyone is different... different health backgrounds... as I said before I don't eat red meat for numerous reasons... I personally feel like crap after eating it... I eat chicken and fish more... once in a great while I will have a steak or burger (usually at Mais' LOL bad influence!) I am a pretty fit woman for in my 40's.

With all things... MODERATION and a balanced diet.

Now I must go to my glorious job which I LOVE. lol

Peace~

Hippie Chic

 

[Mr. Nevermind]

Even though vegetables do not contain creatine, vegetarians do not suffer from creatine deficiency. Creatine can be very beneficial for athletes, is why most will eat alot of meat...


In humans, typically half of stored creatine originates from food (mainly from meat and fish). However, endogenous synthesis of creatine in the liver is sufficient for normal activities. This is evidenced by the fact that, even though vegetables do not contain creatine, vegetarians do not suffer from creatine deficiency. [citation needed] Addition of creatine to the vegetarian diet has been shown to improve athletic performance [1]. Vegetarian creatine can be obtained via chemical synthesis using plant-derived amino acids.

Thats the whole quote. So while your vegatarian frined may be healthy, the addition ofcreatine would actually help her performance.

As far as the silly and lazy comment. i am sorry if i offended you. But in the animal world us drinking milk is silly. Compared to the rest of nature. When a young animal is old enough to eat the mother will not aloow them ot nurse anymore and to eat food. Humans however keep nursing even after not lactating anymore but supplementing with cows milk as opposed to a food source.




Nevermind





Nevermind

 

[9Lives]

And in the human world..sniffing each others asses and eating shit is frowned upon ? Yet animals do it all the time. I agree that nature has many pointers to us humans..But we are a MIRACLE of nature..It's just that most of us don't use our gifts..

Still even the dumbest of us are Gods compared to animals..

 

[genkisan]

And in the human world..sniffing each others asses and eating shit is frowned upon ? Yet animals do it all the time. I agree that nature has many pointers to us humans..But we are a MIRACLE of nature..It's just that most of us don't use our gifts..

Still even the dumbest of us are Gods compared to animals..

Gods are not supposed to kill for fun, torture, wage war, destroy their only home, rape, exploit, poison etc etc.


I must disagree, 9Lives, and say that it is the moment we started to see ourselves as separate and 'higher' than the other animals is when we went wrong and started on the path to extinction we are now on.


All we are is clever monkeys with thumbs and a larynx that walk upright......miracles of Nature don't poison themselves into extinction for greed and amusements sake, as we are doing now.

Our concieted arrogance will be the death of us all, along with our greed.

 

[pieceofmyheart]

Nevermind you can be so rude. Just read back over this thread and see how you have talked to people, and what makes it more funny is that you are so wrong about so many things.

People are fat, because of lack of excercise, not because of fructose. If a person is burning a normal amount calories, they won't get fat.

A mother can lactate indefinately, as long as your diet is good and you are being suckled, you will produce milk forever. I nursed mine until they were toddlers, not just in infancy and in other countries they nurse them till they start school.



ok...now I guess I need to be afraid of the wrath of nevermind....well dear, I'm not so have had it!

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Nevermind you can be so rude. Just read back over this thread and see how you have talked to people, and what makes it more funny is that you are so wrong about so many things.

I am not going back to read all the drivel again but what I can remember.....

People are fat, because of lack of excercise, not because of fructose. If a person is burning a normal amount calories, they won't get fat.

A mother can lactate indefinately, as long as your diet is good and you are being suckled, you will produce milk forever. I nursed mine until they were toddlers, not just in infancy and in other countries they nurse them till they start school.



ok...now I guess I need to be afraid of the wrath of nevermind....well dear, I'm not so have had it!

There are actually numerous studies linking fructose, especially high fructose corn syrup, to premature organ failure, obesity, and increased diabeties rates.

One of the few human studies of low-copper, high-fructose diets was abruptly stopped when 4 of the 24 subjects developed heart-related abnormalities, according to Fields. High fructose diets have also been implicated in the development of adult-onset diabetes. Fructose, especially when combined with other sugars, reduces stores of chromium, a mineral essential for maintaining balanced insulin levels, according to Richard Anderson, Ph.D., lead scientist at the Human Nutrition Research Center in Beltsville, Maryland.

Some experts believe our bodies treat high fructose corn syrup more like a fat than a sugar. They think it may even trigger metabolic changes -- tricking us to eat more and store more fat.

Peter Havel, a nutrition researcher at the University of California, Davis, who has studied the metabolic effects of fructose, has found that several hormones involved in the regulation of body weight do not respond to fructose as they do to other types of sugars, such as glucose.

"Fructose doesn't appear to signal the hormonal systems involved in the long-term regulation of food intake and energy metabolism," he said.

Havel's research shows that fructose does not stimulate insulin and leptin -- two hormones that help turn down the appetite and control body weight. At the same time, fructose does not suppress our body's production of ghrelin, a hormone that increases hunger and appetite.

Other studies have shown that fructose kicks more fat into the bloodstream in the form of triglycerides, which may increase the risk of heart disease.

The debate picked up steam recently with the release of a new study in the July issue of Obesity Research that suggests fructose alters our metabolic rate in a way that favors fat storage.

Havel and researchers at the University of Cincinnati and the German Institute of Human Nutrition fed mice a fructose-sweetened drink, which caused them to store more fat than mice that drank water -- even though they did not consume more calories.

These findings suggest that calorie intake may not be the only explanation for weight gain when people include fructose in their diets, the authors concluded.

Sucrose is composed of glucose and fructose. When sugar is given to rats in high amounts, the rats develop multiple health problems, especially when the rats were deficient in certain nutrients, such as copper. The researchers wanted to know whether it was the fructose or the glucose moiety that was causing the problems. So they repeated their studies with two groups of rats, one given high amounts of glucose and one given high amounts of fructose. The glucose group was unaffected but the fructose group had disastrous results. The male rats did not reach adulthood. They had anemia, high cholesterol and heart hypertrophy--that means that their hearts enlarged until they exploded. They also had delayed testicular development. Dr. Field explains that fructose in combination with copper deficiency in the growing animal interferes with collagen production. (Copper deficiency, by the way, is widespread in America.) In a nutshell, the little bodies of the rats just fell apart. The females were not so affected, but they were unable to produce live young.

"The medical profession thinks fructose is better for diabetics than sugar," says Dr. Field, "but every cell in the body can metabolize glucose. However, all fructose must be metabolized in the liver. The livers of the rats on the high fructose diet looked like the livers of alcoholics, plugged with fat and cirrhotic."

And Now Then... As far as the Milk drinking Issue Goes...

Americans and Europeans think that lactose intolerance (the inability to digest milk products) is some sort of disease. Quite the contrary.

All humans have a gene designed to turn on lactase, the enzyme which allows milk to be digested, at birth. Then after weaning, the gene is programmed to turn lactase off. In other words, the human being was not designed to drink milk after infancy.

Indeed, most of the people in the world are lactose-intolerant as adults, just as nature intended.

However, about 10,000 years ago, the gene mutated in some people, and allowed them to digest milk as adults. Those of us who can drink milk without difficulty -- a small minority of the world's population -- have the "lactose tolerant" gene mutation.

Dr. Leena Peltonen, a geneticist at the University of California Los Angeles:

I think it’s fascinating. People think lactose intolerance is a disease, but this is how everyone was initially.

Mr.Nevermind may have been rude in saying some of what he said...
But to call him wrong and his position drivel may be a bit of a stretch...
Just because we disagree with something doesn't make the opposing viewpoint drivel...