Adarq.org
Performance Area => Article & Video Discussion => Topic started by: andyhug on December 23, 2010, 06:26:52 am
-
Here's my take on milk,
It is unhealthy.
If I even drink milk, it would be almond milk/coconut milk/oatmilk/rice milk/goat milk. As due to the pasteurization and homogenisation it goes through, it loses all its enzymes and nutrients. You can get protein,calcium and vitamin D from elsewhere eg protein from raw nuts-Walnuts, Almonds, Pecans, Macadamia and NON DAIRY sources. You can get calcium from fish like salmon and green leafy vegetables like spinach. We know now how very important Vitamin D is in cancer prevention as well as a host of other health benefits. Fatty fish – such as wild salmon, sardines, and mackerel – are a good source of vitamin D. What is the best source of Vitamin D? SUNLIGHT! Getting 15 to 30 minutes of sun a day produces a healthy amount of Vitamin D. Just don't go for milk.
Here's a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMHvMAUDHj4
Another eyeopening video I think you all must see(check out the other 8 parts on youtube):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSCOC_3nZgg
Ref: See these articles and learn from this guy,
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2009/11/milk-is-not-the-healthy-drink-you-think-it-is/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2010/08/milk-it-doesnt-do-a-body-good/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2008/06/the-truth-about-milk-again/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2008/04/the-pasteurized-vs-raw-milk-debate/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2008/02/the-deception-behind-organic-milk/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2007/12/whats-so-bad-about-milk/ (http://)
http://www.totalhealth4life.net/2010/09/milk-find-out-the-facts-for-once/ (http://)
Bottom line : A no grains, no dairy diet, high in fruits and vegetables, with healthy lean grass-fed meats,nuts,beans,seeds will produce a great state of health, that is RESISTANT to disease. These are what we,humans,are made to eat.
Many of you may beg to differ. But this is just my opinion. Based on these studies from independent sources, its better to be safe than sorry. Anyway, I'm not some kind of nutritionist or expert. I'm 16 only and still learning. As a teenager myself, I try my best to follow it eg Eat organic if possible, but I know I can't control or choose what I want to eat due to financial issues. Having said that, I may want to try this kind of diet when I grow up and make money myself. My advice is that take charge in your own health now and you will live longer :D
-
http://thefitnessinsider.menshealth.com/2007/05/if_you_were_at_.html (http://thefitnessinsider.menshealth.com/2007/05/if_you_were_at_.html)
don't rely on only one source of information! This totalhealth4life-guy doesn't seem to be a nutrition expert...
-
whatever....hold on while I chug this gallon of milk.......
ppl have said shit about milk forever, LUKE LOWERY, and still I drink it an receive protein from it...
-
I think it's OK to drink milk from cows, not sure about bulls though.
-
I think it's OK to drink milk from cows, not sure about bulls though.
ostrich milk is good
-
Milk Intake, Circulating Levels of Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I, and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in Men
* Received December 15, 2000.
* Revision received June 27, 2001.
* Accepted July 6, 2001.
Abstract
Background: Milk and dietary calcium may have antiproliferative effects against colorectal cancer, but milk intake also raises serum levels of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I). A high ratio of IGF-I to IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) has been linked to an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Methods: In a case–control study nested in the Physicians' Health Study, plasma samples were collected from the period 1982 through 1983 from 14 916 men, aged 40–84 years, who also answered dietary questionnaires. Circulating levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 were assayed among 193 men who developed colorectal cancer during 13 years of follow-up and 318 age- and smoking-matched cancer-free control men. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess relative risks (RRs) of colorectal cancer for tertiles of IGF-I/IGFBP-3 and dietary factors. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Overall, there was a moderate but statistically nonsignificant inverse association between intake of low-fat milk or calcium from dairy food and colorectal cancer risk. Intake of dairy food (especially low-fat milk) was also positively and moderately associated with plasma levels of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I/IGFBP-3 among control men. We observed a statistically significant interaction between low-fat milk intake and IGF-I/IGFBP-3 in association with risk of colorectal cancer (Pinteraction = .03). Nondrinkers with IGF-I/IGFBP-3 in the highest tertile had a threefold higher risk than nondrinkers with IGF-I/IGFBP-3 in the lowest tertile (RR = 3.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.29 to 7.24), but no such increase was seen among frequent low-fat milk drinkers (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.41 to 2.69). Conversely, among men with high IGF-I/IGFBP-3, frequent low-fat milk drinkers had a 60% lower risk (95% CI = 0.17 to 0.87; Ptrend = .02) than nondrinkers. Conclusion: Intake of dairy products was associated with a modest increase in circulating IGF-I levels, but intake of low-fat milk was associated with lower risk of colorectal cancer, particularly among individuals with high IGF-I/IGFBP-3. This subpopulation, which is at increased risk of colorectal cancer, might benefit the most from specific dietary intervention.
Milk consumption and cancer incidence: a Norwegian prospective study.
Relationships between milk intake and cancer incidence were investigated after 11 1/2 years of follow-up of 15,914 individuals. A diagnosis of cancer was made in a total of 1,422 individuals. No association was established with total cancer incidence, in analyses adjusted for sex, age and residential characteristics. However, a strong positive association with milk consumption was observed for cancers of the lymphatic organs (odds ratio 3.4 for greater than or equal to 2 glasses per day vs less than 1; 95% confidence interval 1.4-8.2). An inverse association was found for cancer of the bladder. Kidney cancer and cancers of the female reproductive organs (except the uterine cervix) showed weak positive associations with milk intake.
Adolescent milk, dairy product and fruit consumption and testicular cancer.
There is an association between dairy product consumption and the incidence of testicular cancer in different countries. To test the hypothesis that milk and dairy products are risk factors, a case-control study was performed in East Anglia, UK. All the cases were men with testicular cancer and for each of the 200 cases there were four controls, two cancer controls and two population controls. The response rate of those eligible subjects who received a questionnaire was: cases 73%, cancer controls 65% and population controls 57%. All responding subjects completed a dietary questionnaire including questions on current and adolescent milk, dairy product and fruit and vegetable consumption. The answers were corroborated when possible by the subjects' mothers using a separate questionnaire. Cases consumed significantly more milk in adolescence than population controls, but this difference did not apply to other dairy products or fruit. The consumption of milk by cancer controls was intermediate between cases and population controls. Cancer controls with non-epithelial cancers had a milk consumption similar to cases, whereas subjects with epithelial cancers had a consumption similar to population controls. In a multivariate analysis the odds ratio between cases and population controls for the association of undescended testis and testicular cancer was 7.19 (95% CI 2.36-21.9) and for each extra quarter pint of milk consumed it was 1.39 (95% CI 1.19-1.63).
Titre du document / Document title
Prospective study on milk products, calcium and cancers of the colon and rectum
Auteur(s) / Author(s)
JÄRVINEN R. (1) ; KNEKT P. (2 3 4) ; HAKULINEN T. (5 6) ; AROMAA A. (2 3 4) ;
Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s)
(1) Department of Clinical Nutrition, University of Kuopio, Kuopio, FINLANDE
(2) National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, FINLANDE
(3) The Social Insurance Institution, Helsinki, FINLANDE
(4) The Social Insurance Institution, Turku, FINLANDE
(5) Finnish Cancer Registry, Helsinki, FINLANDE
(6) Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Radiumhemmet, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, SUEDE
Résumé / Abstract
Objective: To study the relationship between consumption of milk and milk products, calcium, lactose and vitamin D and occurrence of colorectal cancers. Design: Prospective cohort study. Subjects: A total of 9959 men and women aged 15 y or older without history of cancer at baseline. During a 24 y follow-up, 72 new cancers of the large bowel (38 in the colon and 34 in the rectum) were detected. Results: Consumption of milk and total milk products was suggested to be inversely related to colon cancer incidence, whereas no similar association was seen for rectal cancer. The relative risk between the highest and lowest quartiles of intake adjusted for potential confounding factors was 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.14- 1.46, P for trend 0.09) for milk and 0.37 (95% Cl = 0.12- 1.39, P for trend 0.06) for total milk products. Lactose intake showed a similar inverse relationship with colon cancer: the relative risk was 0.31 (95% CI = 0.08-1.15, P for trend 0.03). Intake of vitamin D or total dietary calcium was not significantly related to colorectal cancer risk, whereas calcium provided by fermented milk products was associated with increased colorectal cancer incidence; in the highest quartile the multivariate adjusted relative risk for colorectal cancer was 2.07 (95% CI = 1.00-4.28). Conclusions: Our results indicate that individuals showing high consumption of milk have a potentially reduced risk of colon cancer; however, the association does not appear to be due to intake of calcium, vitamin D, or to specific effects of fermented milk.
A Role for Milk Proteins and their Peptides in Cancer Prevention
Author: Parodi, P. W.1
Source: Current Pharmaceutical Design, Volume 13, Number 8, March 2007 , pp. 813-828(16)
Abstract:
A role for the amount and type of dietary protein in the etiology of cancer has not been studied extensively. Nevertheless, there is no compelling evidence from epidemiological studies to indicate that protein, at levels usually consumed, is a risk factor for cancer. On the other hand, animal studies suggest that certain peptides and amino acids derived from dietary proteins may influence carcinogenesis. The predominant protein in milk, casein, its peptides, but not liberated amino acids, have antimutagenic properties. Animal models, usually for colon and mammary tumorigenesis, nearly always show that whey protein is superior to other dietary proteins for suppression of tumour development. This benefit is attributed to its high content of cystine/cysteine and ?-glutamylcyst(e)ine dipeptides, which are efficient substrates for the synthesis of glutathione. Glutathione is an ubiquitous cellular antioxidant that directly or through its associated enzymes destroys reactive oxygen species, detoxifies carcinogens, maintains proteins in a reduced state and ensures a competent immune system. Various experiments showed that tumour prevention by dietary whey protein was accompanied by increased glutathione levels in serum and tissues as well as enhanced splenic lymphocyte proliferation, phagocytosis and natural killer, T helper and cytotoxic T cell activity. Whey protein components, ?-lactoglobulin, ?-lactalbumin and serum albumin were studied infrequently, but results suggest they have anticancer potential. The minor component lactoferrin has received the most attention; it inhibits intestinal tumours and perhaps tumours at other sites. Lactoferrin acts by induction of apoptosis, inhibition of angiogenesis, modulation of carcinogen metabolising enzymes and perhaps acting as an iron scavenger. Supplementing cows with selenium increases the content of selenoproteins in milk, which on isolation inhibited colon tumorigenesis in rats.
that study is interesting ^^^
anyway, if anyone has any more REAL studies, post em`..
peace
-
This guy sounds a lot like myself back not too long ago. I wholeheartedly encourage you to keep finding more health related information like this, just realize that in this information age, there are a lot of opinions out there, on youtube and internet. Just realize that nothing is definitive in these fields, almost nothing is really a truth, save for things like blueberries appear blue. Milk happens to be one of those topics where I can confidently say that little is "known."
Pasteurized milk consumption is questionable for sure, and unfortunately adarqui, none of the studies you showed are going to make the matters clearer because of their nature:
Epidemiological studies are way too broad to prove anything, there are too many variables. Fortunately, they show things, and then lab scientists can follow up on the research to find cellular mechanisms. You can have a very low correlation that bears significance with a large enough population with these studies. THe lack of detail makes these studies all speculative. And today, as we're realizing every individual's biochemical uniqueness, you really can't apply conclusions from these studies to yourself without some doubt.
On milk, the most telling evidence imo comes from studying native populations who consume unpasteurized milk straight from the udders which I think has much more therapeutic value for athletes. Why are we in modernized society pasteurizing milk? TO kill bacteria of course, but unfortunately we do remove a few other things, vitamin C, some of the proteins, no need to list them all but these have been studied.
What's the significance? Not too much yet I think; many people drink milk with no problem, however, many do drink milk with problems. As much as I despise using epidemiological studies to prove my points, the Nurses Health Studies did show decreases in bone mineral density in women (again too broad . . .) The reason for the variability in bone density studies is that everyone is of course different... but with athletes, they may readily use the proteins much more than sedentary folk. The hypothesis goes that protein causes acidity ( i kinda forget) which is neutralized by calcium, but in many people, that calcium comes from their own bones.
As a side note, related to our obsession with killing bacteria, there are multiple studies on parasites showing that the lack of them may be contributing to inflammatory conditions today like alzheimers, obesity, depression (yes inflammatory). Here's a link to some of those [http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.com/2010/12/that-tapeworm-ate-your-depression.html]studies[/http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.com/2010/12/that-tapeworm-ate-your-depression.html]. We should have co-evolved with parasites, and most of us do not have enough of them.
As far as the theory that milk is for babies... i think that type of argument gets to heated over creationism, asking "what are we meant to do." If it provides some sort of benefit, why not? And for athletes, we're freaking growing, like babies, so milk is definitely awesome, raw that is imo.
-
Easy calories. I don't care what any study says, cause you always find another study to contradict it.
Our ancestors rarely lasted past the age of 40. I don't care what they ate. They thought you got sick because of the devil.
Here's some broscience for you. As long as you stay at a healthy bodyweight, the types of diseases you get is pretty much decided by genetics. That's why few people who live past 100 actually care about their diet.
-
Easy calories. I don't care what any study says, cause you always find another study to contradict it.
Our ancestors rarely lasted past the age of 40. I don't care what they ate. They thought you got sick because of the devil.
Here's some broscience for you. As long as you stay at a healthy bodyweight, the types of diseases you get is pretty much decided by genetics. That's why few people who live past 100 actually care about their diet.
lol this is a pretty great post..
-
We'll gladly eat the meat, but we won't drink the milk that provided the nutrients for the meat's growth....? That right there just doesn't make sense.
-
Truly and deeply retarded. If you have lactose intolerance, don't drink milk. If you don't like the taste of milk, don't drink milk. Otherwise, don't fucking worry about it.