New Jersey Residents Threatened with Arrest and Fines for Possession of Raw Milk

[Zippyjuan]

If you are getting your milk from a responsible dairy, the benefits outweigh the risks.

Many people who are lactose intolerant have no issue drinking raw milk.

There are also a lot of beneficials in all that live stuff.

Don't you think breastfeeding children is healthy and important?

http://time.com/17483/study-shows-once-and-for-all-that-raw-milk-doesnt-help-lactose-intolerance/

Study Shows That Raw Milk Doesn't Help Lactose Intolerance

Only a small population of people drink unpasteurized milk, also known as “raw” milk, but its increasing popularity has some medical groups concerned. Some raw milk advocates argue that it’s healthier for us since raw milk contains no antibiotics or hormones, while others say it’s better for people with lactose allergies. For its part, the FDA advises against drinking raw milk, which can contain bacteria from fecal matter and sometimes be fatal, and has long stated that it doesn’t help with lactose intolerance.

But a new study published in the Annals of Family Medicine is definitively poking holes in the allergy theory, by reporting that lactose-intolerant people have the same symptoms from raw and pasteurized milk.

Advocates for raw milk claim that it contains good bacteria that can help with lactose absorption. “When I heard that claim it didn’t make sense to me because, regardless of the bacteria, raw milk and pasteurized milk have the same amount of lactose in them,” said study author Christopher Gardner, a professor of medicine at the Stanford Prevention Research Center in a statement. “But I liked the idea of taking this on since it seemed like a relatively straightforward and answerable question because the symptoms of lactose-intolerance are immediate.”

The study was small, with only 16 lactose-intolerant participants. All 16 tried three different types of milk–raw, pasteurized, and soy–over multiple eight-day periods.

For eight days, the participants were randomly assigned to one of the three milks, and they drank an increasing amount of that milk as the study period went on. They then reported their allergy symptoms, which were usually gas, diarrhea, and cramping, and rated them on a scale of 0 to 10. Their breaths were also measured for hydrogen, which can indicate undigested lactose in the colon and intolerance.

After the first eight days of drinking one type of milk, the participants took a week off where they drank no milk, and then started up again with another eight days of a different type of milk. To mask which type of milk participants were drinking, researchers randomized the order and added sugar-free vanilla syrup. Soy, which doesn’t contain lactose, acted as the control.

Researchers found no differences in the hydrogen breath tests between consuming pasteurized or unpasteurized milk. Participants also rated their symptom severity the same, regardless of the type of milk they drank.

Although the study is small, it brings into question the benefits of raw milk for people with lactose intolerance. “It’s not that there was a trend toward a benefit from raw milk and our study wasn’t big enough to capture it; it’s that there was no hint of any benefit,” said Gardner in a statement.

Link to study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3948760/

 

[lilymc]

I agree with most on this thread that people should be able to put parasite–ridden animal breast milk into their body, if that's what they really want to do.

But I think if most people knew the truth about dairy… both the health side of it, and what takes place before it gets to you, even on the so-called "humane" farms... they would ditch it ASAP.

Even on the smaller farms, calves are taken away from their mother, usually on the first day of their life....Because we can't have the baby cow drinking our milk, can we? This separation is deeply distressful to both the mother and the baby. Then since the male calves are useless to the dairy industry, they are either killed immediately or they are raised for veal, meaning they will be put in a very small pen, not allowed to move so their muscles atrophy, and then of course they are killed at a young age so someone can satisfy their desire for baby flesh.

Please watch this video, the whole thing.

 

[dannno]

http://time.com/17483/study-shows-once-and-for-all-that-raw-milk-doesnt-help-lactose-intolerance/



Link to study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3948760/

So some retarded scientist who straight out admits he didn't understand the science before or after did some bullshit study and got a mention in Time? So what? Why should I believe the retarded scientist who didn't even spend 3 fucking minutes doing the basic research regarding WHY it is better for those who are lactose intolerant?? It isn't very difficult to find nor understand.

I'm guessing he pastuerized the raw milk himself so he wouldn't 'endanger' the study participants, and called it raw milk, or some bullshit like that.

Milk pasteurization damages the enzyme lactase – this enzyme is required to digest the milk sugar lactose. When we are babies, all of us produce lactase – in fact, it’s the reason that babies can drink breast milk. The sad part is… around the age of 4, lactase production declines on a massive scale – and and most of us are weaned by that age.Having no lactase in the milk (pasteurized) or the person drinking the milk makes for digestive distress and what we all know as lactose intolerance.

​

When drinking raw milk, this is not a problem – because raw milk isn’t pasteurized and therefore the lactase is readily available.Thus, most people who are lactose intolerant to pasteurized milk can thrive on raw milk. My husband is one – several years later, he not only drinks it regularly, he thrives.

https://www.rebootedmom.com/2017/05/06/why-raw-milk-may-help-with-lactose-intolerance/

 

[Zippyjuan]

So some retarded scientist who straight out admits he didn't understand the science before or after did some bull$#@! study and got a mention in Time? So what? Why should I believe the retarded scientist who didn't even spend 3 $#@!ing minutes doing the basic research regarding WHY it is better for those who are lactose intolerant?? It isn't very difficult to find nor understand.

I'm guessing he pastuerized the raw milk himself so he wouldn't 'endanger' the study participants, and called it raw milk, or some bull$#@! like that.



https://www.rebootedmom.com/2017/05/06/why-raw-milk-may-help-with-lactose-intolerance/

https://www.livestrong.com/article/370513-benefits-of-raw-milk/

Neither raw nor pasteurized milk contains lactase. Lactic acid bacteria in raw milk produce lactase, which may make raw milk more easily digestible for those who are lactose-intolerant; however, Claeys states in “Food Control” that the production of lactase by these bacteria is very limited at the refrigeration temperature required for storage of raw milk.

 

[euphemia]

Looks like the anti-choice faction has showed up.

Control the food and you control the people.

 

[dannno]

https://www.livestrong.com/article/370513-benefits-of-raw-milk/

Do you even read what you post?? Try reading the part that isn't in bold..

THEN consider that the raw milk sits in your stomach, where it is not refrigerated, and produces lactase, and is then digested...

This stuff isn't that hard.

 

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.godairyfree.org/news/what-is-lactase

Actually it is hard.

Timing is Tricky with Lactase

If taken on an empty stomach, the high acidity level in your gut will destroy the lactase before it can work its magic. However, you need the lactase to hit your intestines before the lactose arrives. Taking it in the first five minutes of eating seems to be the most effective timing. Unfortunately, this means you must plan ahead to have the enzymes with you, but you can’t take them in advance. Plus, many people forget, or take the enzymes too late.

 

[lilymc]

Looks like the anti-choice faction has showed up.

Who? He can correct me if I'm wrong but I think Zippy is the only one on the government's side here. (As usual.)

 

[euphemia]

Yes, and he showed up. I have never tasted raw milk, but I know my sister in-law uses it. I might ask her to get extra next time.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Who? He can correct me if I'm wrong but I think Zippy is the only one on the government's side here. (As usual.)

I am not against choice.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I am not against choice.

Not as an abstract or in certain specific cases maybe but in most cases you are.

 

[dannno]

https://www.godairyfree.org/news/what-is-lactase

Actually it is hard.

Well we have one bullshit artist who did a bullshit experiment for the Milk (tm) industry and we have a bunch of people who are lactose intolerant who say they can drink raw milk..

I know who I'm inclined to believe, and I also know who you are inclined to believe, even though your inclination is completely irrational.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Well we have one bull$#@! artist who did a bull$#@! experiment for the Milk (tm) industry and we have a bunch of people who are lactose intolerant who say they can drink raw milk..

I know who I'm inclined to believe, and I also know who you are inclined to believe, even though your inclination is completely irrational.

I tend to go with actual studies over online anecdotal reports. But that is just me. Your standards for proof may be different.

 

[dannno]

I tend to go with actual studies over online anecdotal reports. But that is just me. Your standards for proof may be different.

Well the fact that I've seen so many bullshit studies that have been disproven, especially when it comes to profit motives like the Milk (tm) industry has, yes I suppose my standard of proof is much higher than yours.

Your only standard is whether it was published in a bullshit establishment journal that is probably being paid off, whereas my standard of proof extends far beyond that.

 

[tod evans]

I agree with most on this thread that people should be able to put parasite–ridden animal breast milk into their body, if that's what they really want to do.

It's certainly more nutritious than the white water sold in the supermarkets..

But I think if most people knew the truth about dairy… both the health side of it, and what takes place before it gets to you, even on the so-called "humane" farms... they would ditch it ASAP.

I know firsthand and love consuming both dairy and beef.

Even on the smaller farms, calves are taken away from their mother, usually on the first day of their life....Because we can't have the baby cow drinking our milk, can we? This separation is deeply distressful to both the mother and the baby. Then since the male calves are useless to the dairy industry, they are either killed immediately or they are raised for veal, meaning they will be put in a very small pen, not allowed to move so their muscles atrophy, and then of course they are killed at a young age so someone can satisfy their desire for baby flesh.

Actually most dairy calf's are raised for either milk production or cut and raised for beef, very few are raised for veal and only a complete idiot would kill a calf that's worth money the moment it drops.

Please watch this video, the whole thing.

Sorry Lily not gonna do it. I'm okay with folks who want to "protect" livestock buying all they can afford to keep and protecting the hell out of 'em...

I just wonder why they can't be okay with me consuming mine?

 

[lilymc]

It's certainly more nutritious than the white water sold in the supermarkets..

I don't know what you mean by white water, but it's actually not. Numerous studies have shown the connection between a protein found in animal milk and certain types of cancer. Among other things.

Of course we've been inundated with so called studies that say dairy is healthy, but those studies have been shown to be funded by the dairy industry.

In fact, I highly recommend that everyone watch the documentary "What The Health" which shows the collusion between the animal industries and government.

Also, there's a reason why the majority of the worlds population is "lactose intolerant." I don't think it's difficult to figure out what that reason is.

Actually most dairy calf's are raised for either milk production or cut and raised for beef, very few are raised for veal and only a complete idiot would kill a calf that's worth money the moment it drops.

Well, thankfully the demand for veal in the US has decreased in the last several years, but there is still a demand for veal in the world, so that is the fate of some of the male calfs.

Secondly, idiotic or not, some male calfs are killed as waste products of the dairy industry. Take a look:



Also, there's a demand for soft leather, so that's another reason why some male calfs have a very short life.

Sorry Lily not gonna do it. I'm okay with folks who want to "protect" livestock buying all they can afford to keep and protecting the hell out of 'em...

I just wonder why they can't be okay with me consuming mine?

You're not gonna what… watch the video? The reason I posted that is because I think everyone should at least be aware of what they are supporting. You said that you were, and it seems you don't have a problem with the calfs being taken away from their mother, so there's not much more I can say to you about this.

However, I think it's safe to say that many people who consume dairy are simply unaware of what happens, and if they saw some of what goes on, for example separating the baby from his mother, they would ditch dairy...especially when it's so easy to drink almond milk or numerous other types of plant-based milks. Why would they continue to drink something that has been linked to cancer and other health problems, often contains pus or parasites, and involves cruel and unnatural practices when there are so many good alternatives?