What To Drink Part 3: What's Right With Milk? (Part B)

Milk churns awaiting collection near to Chastleton, Oxfordshire, Great Britain.
© Copyright David Luther Thomas and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons License.

This is our fifth installment in the What To Drink series and the deluge is not stopping anytime soon!


Here are the previous posts if you need to catch up:

What's Wrong With Juice?

What's Wrong With Milk? (Part A)

What's Wrong With Milk? (Part B)
What's Right With Milk?  (Part A)


In my last post, we discussed how you can be healthy with raw milk (NOT to be confused with that pasteurized, homogenized, dead bacteria and detrimental bacteria infested, watery, white liquid even if it's organic).  


Raw milk brings up a lot of questions.  Most notably: Is it safe?  The dairy industry wants you to believe that it isn't, but don't forget they have an agenda to keep themselves in business.  They don't want to and probably financially can't substitute their feed grains for grass to raise healthy cows that produce healthy raw milk.   Instead, you get unhealthy cows and milk that has to be processed to be safe, if even then.  According to raw milk producer Organic Pastures, that's what started milk pasteurization in the first place.  People were getting sick off of unclean milk from unhealthy cows.  It was either clean up the processing and distribution or clean up the cows and dairy industry.  And, unfortunately, we know which road they chose to take.    


But Isn't Raw Milk Dangerous?

Milk from a healthy, properly fed and cared for cow is not dangerous, nor is its meat, unless you expose it to bacterial contamination by unclean handling.  Same goes for most foods.  Just like any other product, milk is vulnerable to contamination.  If you read (Part B), it probably won't come as a surprise, but there is debate over which milk is more dangerous: pasteurized or raw.  According to Organic Pastures's FAQ, pasteurized milk is NOT completely safe and raw milk actually has stricter standards on its safety: 

Current (PMO) Federal standards for pasteurized milk permit 100,000 bacteria per ml for milk going to be pasteurized with as many as 20,000 injured or living bacteria to be alive after pasteurization, and this may include pathogens (this is arguably the reason why milk is pasteurized). California standards for human consumption raw milk require that milk sold for raw consumption have fewer than 10 coliforms and fewer than 15,000 live bacteria per ml and no pathogens. OPDC [Organic Pastures Dairy Company] averages about 1500 beneficial living bacteria per ml and no test has ever detected a human pathogen in our “raw milk samples.” 

The whole FAQ is well worth the read, but here is another important tidbit about why raw milk (from certified sources like Organic Pastures) is safe:

It is possible, but highly unlikely, that pathogens may be transmitted in raw milk just as they may be transmitted in all other foods. OPDC has demonstrated that even when high levels of pathogens were introduced into raw milk, they die off and do not grow (BSK tests). In fact, pathogen killing safety systems are hard at work, keeping raw milk safe even if it has been contaminated. OPDC products are highly pathogen resistant. 

For more on the safety of raw milk, read this article at Raw-Milk-Facts and another written by Organic Pastures founder Mark McAfee at A Campaign for Real Milk sponsored by the Weston A. Price Foundation.  Need a nice graphic to put all this together?  Here is Organic Pastures's colorful chart comparing conventional, organic, and certified raw products and practices.  All I can say is WOW. 

Quality Not Quantity

Despite these arguments, Real Raw Milk Facts offers a counterpoint.  

Statistics from the CDC and State Health Departments comparing raw and pasteurized dairy products linked to reported foodborne disease outbreaks (1973-2006) show that raw milk and Mexican-style queso fresco soft cheeses (usually made from raw milk) caused almost 70% of the reported outbreaks even though only 1-3% of the population consumes raw dairy products.  If raw and pasteurized milk were equally risky, it would be expected that there would be far more pasteurized outbreaks since the number of people drinking conventional milk is so much higher.

Is it just me or does it scare you a little that over 30% of reported outbreaks come from pasteurized milk?  It scares me even more than the raw milk figures.  Why?  Because I thought pastueization allowed me to trust their santized product.  Guess not.  Whereas the raw milk dangers are a common sense "duh."  I am sure there are plenty of behind-the-counter exchanges of not-so-kosher raw milk because it is freakin' illegal in most states to sell it.  There's NO chance of federal regulation and quality standards if it is illegal!  Luckily in California I can drink raw milk when I want to.  And since it is legal, it is highly regulated and I can trust it more than I can ever trust pasteurized milk.  Why?  Raw milk producers have their reputation on the line and don't dare add ammunition for the "ban raw milk" lobbyists. 


Organic Pastures provides another reason for the reports.  Basically, you need thriving gut flora (beneficial bacteria) to break down your food in your intestines.  The problem is that most people don't, so they get sick more easily when foreign bacteria are ingested.  Most people live off of a processed diet that has killed off all of the bacteria, both good and bad.  Their guts are sensitive to strangers, so they act out and cause of person to get sick when exposed to something foreign.  That's one reason why most of us can't drink the water in third world countries without getting sick, but yet the people who live there can drink their water and don't get sick.  That is another reason to drink raw milk and other pro-biotic foods.  According to Organic Pastures's FAQ: 

It has been estimated that about 70% of the strength of a healthy immune system is made up of the diversity of living bacteria found in the intestines.

Bottom line: Don't drink milk you can't trust.  


How do you do this?  According to Dr. Mercola, you need to find out if:

• [The milk has a] Low pathogenic bacteria count (ie does the farmer test his milk regularly for pathogens?)
• The milk is quickly chilled after milking
• The milk comes from cows raised naturally, in accordance with the seasons
• The cows are mainly grass-fed
• The cows are not given antibiotics and growth hormones to increase milk production
• Cows are well cared for

Is all of this a little impersonal, a facts and figures sort of thing?  Well,  A Tale of Two Milks is a heart-wrenching personal story illustrating just how important quality can be.  A dairy farmer and grandfather adds to our list of quality control measures:

1. Never use milk from a sick cow.
2. Never let anything dirty get into the milk. 
3. Keep everything clean. 
4. Keep it cold. 
5. Keep the cows on the pasture so they could eat the living grass and plants. 

You also want to make sure the milk is intended to be consumed raw, which is a completely different product than raw milk intended to be pasteurized.   The milk intended to be pasteurized is likely from cows fed an unhealthy diet of grains and pumped full of antibiotics to keep them alive.  It's no wonder people get sick from drinking raw milk from those cows!

Unfortunately, the clout of the mega-corp dairy producers keeps independent raw dairy producers struggling to gain a foothold.  Raids are quite common in states where the sale of raw milk is illegal, which is the majority of US states.  Why is it illegal?  Raw milk is a threat to the dairy industry.  It would take an astronomical amount of money for the dairy industry to feed and care for their cattle in a humane way that led to nutritious milk.  So they have no choice but to pasteurize their contaminated product and try their damnedest to quell the excitement over their competitor: raw milk. 

Bottom line: If you are going to drink milk, choose raw, organic, full-fat grass-fed, dairy, otherwise known as Real Milk.  

Keep reading the series for more on the flavored milk controversy in schools and for more on other popular beverages!

What To Drink Part 3: What is Right with Milk? (Part A)

Picture courtesy of Flickr

This is our fourth installment in the What To Drink series.  We already tackled juice: 

What's Wrong With Juice?

and the detriments of milk:
What's Wrong With Milk? (Part A)

What's Wrong With Milk? (Part B)

We've already made a strong argument NOT to drink pasteurized milk if at all possible.  And I think Dr. Cordain (author of The Paleo Diet) makes a good argument to NOT include ANY dairy in your diet.  You'll be fine without it as long as you eat your vegetables as part of a healthy paleo-style diet.  


But let's play devil's advocate and say you want to drink milk.  I know I do on occasion, may the paleo gods smite me for it.  There is nothing in this world like a breve latte (it's a bowlful!) from Santa Cruz's finest: Verve.  Seriously chill place.  And a life devoid of cheese?  Not.  Worth.  Living.  So without a bona-fide dairy allergy making it impossible to partake, I do perchance partake.  Is that okay?  


Today, let's turn the milk debate around and ask:


Can You Be Healthy WITH Milk?

Although the Paleo Diet (as Dr. Cordain envisioned) doesn't advocate milk or any other dairy, many paleo dieters categorize themselves as paleo + dairy or Lacto Paleo.  Mark's Daily Apple's Primal Diet doesn't promote, but isn't against including dairy.  The Weston A. Price Foundation definitely advocates raw dairy.  There is a kaleidoscope of possibilities for inclusion or exclusion of dairy in your diet, such as only raw, grass-fed, organic or from only certain animals (cow, goat, sheet, etc.), or certain forms like butter and/or cream but not milk.  Take your pick. 

The best answer to this question comes from YOU.  My suggestion: give up ALL dairy for at least two weeks.  Then, introduce it back in slowly, one type at a time and see what happens.  If you get all phlegmy and symptomatic, then guess what?  You are sensitive to dairy!  So maybe it doesn't make you as healthy as you can be.  You might find that you digest certain forms of dairy better than others.  Congratulations, now you have choices!  You can't say it makes YOU healthy or not unless YOU give it the old N=1 self experimentation.  Believe me, it is eye-opening! 

Why Drink Milk?

If you read our last installment, What's Wrong With Milk? (Part A) and (Part B), you may question whether or not anyone really needs milk in their diet.  Well, here is one reason: putting on the poundage.  Weightlifters know the benefits of milk for mass gaining and many practice GOMAD: gallon of milk a day.  According to them, it is ideal for putting on weight.  That is something to keep in mind if you are an adult who drinks milk daily and might be watching your weight.  If you are trying to lose weight, milk is definitely NOT what you want to be drinking.  

But what if you just want to drink milk and aren't on a weight loss plan?  Is milk healthy?  The answer is: it depends on whether or not it's pasteurized (heated to kill bacteria) and homogenized (squeezed through a fine strainer to break up fat and eliminate separation).  Hint the more processing, the less nutrition.  That is true of everything.  It also matters whether or not the milk comes from grass-fed or grain-fed cows, just like beef.  Grain-fed cows are NOT healthy, so guess how healthy their milk is?  It isn't all that surprising that if we feed cows and other milk animals what they evolved to eat, we get a superior product.  And that product is a real food on its OWN.  It doesn't need any enriching or processing to make it better than it already is.  


Conclusion: If you choose to partake, raw milk is the way to go!

What are the Potential Benefits of Raw Milk?

Dairy proponents like the Weston Price Foundation and raw milk producer Organic Pastures extol the benefits of raw milk to your digestive system and health.   Dr. Mercola interviewed Organic Pastures founder Mark McAffee and describes the benefits of raw milk, including:

• Valuable enzymes that are destroyed during pasteurization. Without them, milk is very difficult to digest. So if you have lactose intolerance, it may very well disappear once you start consuming raw dairy products.
• It also contains phosphatase, an enzyme that aids and assists in the absorption of calcium in your bones, and lipase enzyme, which helps to hydrolyze and absorb fats.
• Enzymes are deactivated when you get above 120 degrees. By the time you get to 150, 160 degrees, almost all of them are completely inactivated, which is why you will not get ANY of these benefits from pasteurized milk.
• Natural butterfat, which is homogenized or removed in pasteurized milk. Without butterfat, it becomes very difficult for your body to absorb and utilize the vitamins and minerals in the water fraction of the milk. Butterfat is also your best source of preformed vitamin A, and contains re-arranged acids with strong anti-carcinogenic properties.
• Healthy unoxidized cholesterol
• Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), which fights cancer and may help reduce your body fat.
• High omega-3 and low omega-6 ratios, which is the beneficial ratio between these two essential fats

The website Raw Milk Facts adds to that list:

• Proteins, including all 8 essential amino acids and heat-sensitive whey (interesting factoid: denatured whey is what turns milk white, which is why raw milk isn't bone white)
• Carbohydrate in the form of lactose which becomes lactic acid at the end of its digestion, an antibacterial substance that improves absorption of minerals and proteins  
• Fats, including CLA, saturated fat, and butyric acid (find out more about this important fat at the Whole Health Source--the article that prompted me to add butter back into my diet again!)
• Vitamins: A, C, D, K, E, B1, B2, niacin, B6, pantothenic acid, B12, biotin, and folic acid
• Minerals:
• Calcium
• Phosphorus
• Magnesium
• Potassium
• Sodium
• Zinc
• Chlorine
• Iron
• Copper
• Sulfates
• Bicarbonates
• Trace Elements

Fat is listed by both sources, so don't be afraid of full-fat dairy.  Fat is NOT what makes you fat.  That fat in milk helps you absorb the fat soluble vitamins in milk.  And milk has the beneficial fat CLA (conjugated linoleic acid), which fights cancer and has been linked to weight loss.  Since grass-fed cattle have 3-5 times as much CLA as feedlot cows, here is just one more reason quality matters.  For more on CLA and grass-fed animals (as well as where to buy grass-fed meat and dairy and pastured eggs) check out Eat Wild. 

Can pasteurized, even organic pasteurized milk compare with the nutritional bounty of raw milk?  Check out Organic Pastures's Why Raw chart comparing Conventional, USDA Certified Organic, and Raw USA Certified.  Still not convinced?  Check back for our next installment on the safety of raw milk.  It'll be eye-opening!


In the meantime: At least do your body a favor and buy organic, full-fat, grass-fed dairy.  And open your mind to at least TRY raw dairy.  What does it taste like?  Milk.  Real milk.  The milkiest milk you've ever tasted.  For me, I'll exchange watery, conventional milk for rich, creme anglaise raw milk any day!   

Bottom line: If you are going to drink milk, choose raw, organic, full-fat grass-fed, dairy, otherwise known as Real Milk.  

Keep reading the series for more on raw milk and questions about its safety!

What To Drink Part 2: What's Wrong With Milk? (Part B)

Awesome pic off a milk carton by: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndanger/3359606599/

Sorry for the vacation-related hiatus, but back to more on what (and what not) to drink following a paleo-style approach.  If you missed the first parts of the series, check them out here:

What's Wrong With Juice?

What's Wrong With Milk? (Part A)

Today, let's talk more about what is wrong with milk.  (Don't worry, we'll get to the benefits next time, I promise!)

Why Pasteurization and Homogenization is NOT Healthy

With all processing, nutrition is lost, BUT the product now has a longer shelf life and is more uniform even though its constituent parts may vary.  The same goes for milk.  Pasteurization involves rapidly heating milk to kill off ALL of its bacteria, beneficial probiotics and any detrimental bacteria alike.  Pasteurization heats milk to 161 degrees Fahrenheit for 15-20 seconds while "ultra" pasteurization heats to 275 degrees Fahrenheit for a fraction of a second, resulting in an even longer shelf life.  

This is a great quality control mechanism for producers of conventional milk.  They can make their fortunes from confined cows eating pesticide-sprayed and genetically-modified grains they were not designed to eat (they evolved to eat grass) and that make them sick.  To keep their cows alive, producers (a more fitting term than farmers) pump the sick cows full of antibiotics and add growth hormones to increase their milk production.  

And where do you think all those chemicals go?  That's right: into the milk.  Mothers provide their offspring with nutrients and toxins (pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, etc.) alike.  But don't worry, pasteurization is an equalizing step designed to make a safe product even though the input might be quite less than.  Or is it?  

With the advent of pasteurization, it doesn't matter if the cows are sick because the pooled product is (supposedly) sanitized, uniform, and ready to ship.  Unfortunately, all the nutrient potential of real milk fresh from a healthy cow is lost in this process.  Not only is the milk toxic from inhumane farming practices, but it is heated literally to death.  The final product is less nutritious, not more.  With pasteurization, outbreaks of disease are now distributed rapidly from large processing facilities and people forget that milk comes from cows, not from a store. 

Is Conventional Milk Even Safe for Calves?

Here is a rather disturbing publication out of New Mexico State University on feeding "waste" milk to dairy calves.  According to them, "waste milk" is milk not fit for human consumption because it comes from cows fed antibiotics (NOTE: from other sources, it looks like antibiotics ARE still present in conventional milk because they have a heck of a time trying to prevent their residues).  Never wanting to waste money, waste milk is fed to calves, who thereby inherit the antibiotic load.  The article cautions to not feed waste milk to meat animals because the toxins will store in their tissues.  But this is safe for young dairy cows who will give us their milk in the future?  How does that make sense?  Here is their telling precaution about pasteurizing waste milk:

Although pasteurization reduces the microbial load of waste milk, pasteurization is not sterilization. A heavy bacterial load in waste milk will not be eliminated completely by pasteurization. Also, pasteurization does not remove potential contamination from antibiotics in waste milk.

That really sounds like "an economical and nutritious source of liquid feed for young dairy calves" doesn't it?  And don't forget that this warning applies to our OWN pasteurized milk, especially from non-organic sources.  Quality matters!

Laundry List of Problems with Pasteurized Milk

Unfortunately, despite the extended shelf life, pasteurized milk is already on the out.  It's virgin soil to pathogens and without the protection of the beneficial bacteria that were killed right alongside any detrimental strands, pathogens are free to invade and have a field day.  The heat also denatures the whey proteins, turning pasteurized milk its characteristic white hue.  And the dead bacteria?  Still in there.  Yum!  

And NO, ultra pasteurization is NOT better than regular pasteurization despite the cool "ultra" tag.  In fact, the higher heat effects the amino acids, thereby diminishing some nutrient value.  Here is a great rundown of the nutrient costs of pasteurization (bullets added for emphasis):

• Pasteurization also cuts the nutrient content of the milk. Pasteurized milk has up to a 66 percent loss of vitamins A, D and E. 50% of the Vitamin C is lost. High heat affects water soluble vitamins and less effective. How much less? Anywhere for 35-80%. Vitamins B6 and B12 are completely destroyed during pasteurization.

• Pasteurization also kills numerous beneficial enzymes, antibodies and hormones. Pasteurization destroys lipase (an enzyme that breaks down fat), which impairs fat metabolism and the ability to properly absorb fat soluble vitamins A and D. This is why the milk is fortified with vitamin D. It is also why Americans in the 20th century experienced high cholesterol like never before. 

• Milk is a wonderful source of calcium, but pasteurization makes calcium and other minerals harder to absorb. One method of testing to see if milk has been adequately pasteurized is to test to make sure that phosphates have been completely removed. Phosphates are essential for the absorption of calcium. Uh oh.

Back in 2003, Dr. Mercola pulled together a sizable list of published studies finding fault with pasteurized milk.  Compared to raw milk, pasteurized milk led to a loss of vitamins, increased incidence of tooth decay, less benefit to growth and development, less resistance to disease, and less calcium availability.  How exactly is this beneficial?

Pathogen Playground

And don't think that pasteurization actually kills ALL the pathogens.  Unfortunately, that isn't the case.  Take Crohn's Disease, a chronic inflammatory bowel disease.  Although there is no definitive cause or cure yet, a pathogen from cattle (and other ruminants) called Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) creates a very similar condition in cattle as it might also create in humans.  In cattle, it's called Johne's Disease.  Johne's Disease is a fatal gastrointestinal disease that is contagious and may lie dormant in cattle without symptoms for months to years after infection.  The signs of infection are rapid weight loss and diarrhea, which sounds a lot like Crohn's Disease in humans.  Similarly, both have intestinal inflammation.  Since symptoms may be delayed after Johne's infection, the best prevention for dairy farmers is testing and only adding clean animals to the herd.  Plus, proper care of young animals when infection rate is highest is equally important and that means clean milk (NOT "waste" milk!) and a clean environment.  While Johne's looks a lot like Crohn's, MAP have not been found in all Crohn's patients and there is contention over whether or not the presence of MAP is just a side effect of an intestinal tract that is already out of microbial balance.  The current research shows many similarities between the two diseases, but no definitive link yet.  Still, the similarities are pretty obvious enough to take precautions if you have Crohn's.  One would be to limit your exposure to more MAP, which would benefit those suffering from Crohn's and healthy folks alike.  How do people get MAP?  Here are the primary sources:

• Raw milk from MAP-infected dairy herds.
• Ground beef originating from MAP-infected dairy cattle sold for slaughter.
• Domestic water originating from surface sources vulnerable to runoff from MAP-infected farms.
• Cuts of beef originating from MAP-infected beef cattle.
• HTST pasteurized milk.

Yes, unfortunately MAP can survive pasteurization.  So how does this add to our discussion of pasteurization?  Well, for one: pasteurization doesn't protect you against everything, and two: conventional dairy relies on pasteurization instead of proper care and feeding of its animals to produce quality milk, so it's cows are more likely to have MAP infection than those producers who believe that healthy cows produce healthy milk.

How do you avoid your exposure to MAP?  Know the source of your meat and dairy and make sure it is clean.  This isn't so difficult if you buy grass-fed beef directly from a farmer (like Morris Grassfed in CA) who can answer questions about it's quality.  Same goes for dairy.  Good luck tracking down the purity of conventional milk, but if you find small suppliers, it's possible.  For example, despite the raw milk warning, raw milk producers like Organic Pastures can attest to the quality of their milk and work hard to keep it clean and pathogen free because there is so much backlash against raw milk.  Find more quality, local sources for meat and dairy at Eat Wild's extensive database.

What's Wrong with Homogenization?

Homogenization squeezes the milk through a fine filter to break down fat and keep it from separating out like the cream that rises to the top of raw milk.  Homogenization makes fat molecules smaller and smaller, which allows them to pass through the lining of your gut, transporting substances that shouldn't leave your digestive tract into your bloodstream superhighway.  Not cool.   One of those substances that shouldn't leave the digestive tract is an enzyme called xanthine oxidase, which plays a role in heart disease.  It's carried by homogenized milk fat into the bloodstream.  What other nasties sneak in this backdoor?

How Does Pasteurized and Homogenized Milk Compare with Raw Milk?


If you check out this colorful chart from Organic Pastures's website, you can plainly see the differences between raw milk and pasteurized, homogenized (to be concise, let's call it PH for pasteurized and homogenized) conventional and organic milk.  With conventional PH milk, there are additives and preservatives, in addition to the hormones, antibiotics, and genetically-modified, pesticide-sprayed grain feeds (whew! that's a mouthful!).  Even in organic PH milk the butterfat, vitamins, and protein need to be added back in and anything goes with the feed as long as it's organic (like the chart says, remember there are organic donuts, so "organic" does NOT mean healthy!).  Organic grains are just as unhealthy for cows as non-organic.  Cows evolved to eat grass.  Period.

The processing involved in producing PH milk leads to lactose intolerance among it's drinkers even in the organic milk because the enzyme to digest lactose has been destroyed through processing.  Hence, more people are allergic to conventional and organic PH milk than raw milk.

Finally, PH milk is NOT safer.  According to the chart, 31% of the time human pathogens are still found in PH milk!  Compare that to Organic Pastures's assertion that human pathogens "have never been found in RAW USA samples."

So do you really want to drink a processed, nutrient-poor, watery, white liquid potentially filled with pathogens, and definitely filled with dead bacteria, denatured proteins, and altered fat molecules?  Really sounds like it "does a body good" doesn't it?

What other choice do you have if you want to drink milk?  Go RAW!

Check back for our next installment about raw milk.  Hope this was an educational and eye-opening journey for you today!  I know it definitely was for me!

What To Drink Part 2: What's Wrong with Milk?

Here is our second installment in the series: What To Drink
Read the first part here: What's Wrong With Juice?


Milk has been the norm for a child's meal-time beverage for quite some time.  I know in my family we ALL drank milk with dinner.  And since fatphobia was (and still is for the misinformed) still the rage, our milk was the lowest percentage of fat still palatable.  For me, that was 1%.  I always looked upon skim milk with disgust as being cloudy water, but respected those who could sacrifice their sense of taste to drink it.  Skim milk was hardcore.  But do adults really need milk?  Do kids really need milk?

This is a highly debated topic amongst the paleo/primal community.  For many, nutrition is like religion and dairy is one of the saints.  Personal stories take either side of the debate: some being healed by dairy (notice it is raw dairy), others eliminating it from their diets for even better health.  


Let's dive in. 


Can You Be Healthy WITHOUT Milk?

Since milk is a given for most families, let's play devil's advocate.  Does anyone really need milk?  The common argument is over calcium.  If I don't drink milk, can I get enough calcium?  Paleo dieters, the lactose intolerant, and others who withhold dairy from their diets need to get their calcium from other food sources (fish, shellfish, and leafy greens).  It also helps if they and don't muck up their digestive tract's absorption by consuming grains or legumes, which contain phytates that bind to minerals like calcium and which carry an acidic load that leads to calcium loss.  


Can you be healthy without milk?  Yes, even kids can be healthy without milk, following a paleo diet.  Here is Robb Wolf's analysis of the paleo diet for kids.  His conclusion?  It is definitely more healthy than following the USDA guidelines AND you get enough nutrients that it looks like you are taking a nutritional supplement; the recommended dietary allowances (RDA) are blown out of the water!  


However, you might have noticed that calcium is below the RDA.  Before this alarms you, read how Dr. Loren Cordain, author of The Paleo Diet, explains that here.  Basically, your absorption of calcium is improved when you have a healthy gut, so no worries and no need to drink milk.   Leafy greens like brassica plants (ex. kale) have calcium we can absorb better than milk, and a paleo diet keeps the acids and bases in balance so you aren't leaching calcium from your bones.  In fact, the high protein in a paleo diet increases calcium absorption and builds bone rather than breaking it down.  Finally, as a low glycemic diet, the paleo diet controls insulin levels thereby avoiding hyperinsulinemia (elevated insulin), which leads to urinary calcium loss.  


Cordain doesn't include dairy in his diet for numerous reasons, like the proteins most are allergic to, the inflammatory effect, the autoimmune disease risk, etc.  Here are the specifics from his blog's question and answer section:

• Milk is a source of estrogens and dihydrotestosterone precursors, which can increase the risk of certain cancers and acne.
• Milk increases IGF-1, and the IGF-1/IGFBP-3 ratio, and this increases the risk of certain cancers and acne--among other diseases--as explained by Dr. Cordain in his 2003 paper “Hyperinsulinemic diseases of civilization: more than just syndrome X” 
• Milk contains insulin, and bovine insulin differs in only 3 amino acids from human insulin. This feature can increase the risk of Type 1 diabetes in genetically susceptible persons.
• Betacellulin: is a hormone belonging to the EGF family of hormones. If it is confirmed that Betacellulin is able to enter circulation, then there is a very good possibility that it may increase the susceptibility of certain epithelial cancers.
• Milk elevates insulin as much as white bread. Constantly elevating plasma insulin levels may lead to insulin resistance, which is at the root of several metabolic diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes or hypertension.
• High calcium intake adversely affects zinc absorption, a key mineral in more than 300 enzymatic reactions.
• Milk contains several allergenic proteins.
• Dairy products, especially hard cheeses, yield a very high net acidic load which might lead to calcium and muscle loss and decrease growth hormone.

There's even more explanation here, also on his Paleo Diet Blog.  Here are the main points (see site for citations and much more depth):

1) Milk and fermented milk (yoghurt, for instance), despite having a low Glycemic Index and Load, elicit a very high insulin response and this has been shown repeatedly in intervention studies.   

2) Cow’s milk appears to be involved in certain Autoimmune diseases (AD):

•  Type 1 Diabetes 
• Multiple Sclerosis  
• Rheumatoid Arthritis 
• Crohn's disease 
• Sjögren's syndrome 
• IgA nephropathy 
• Behçet's disease 
• Celiac Disease. 

3) Hormones in Milk:  

Here’s a short list of some hormones present in cow’s milk that could be problematic for humans:

• Insulin
• IGF-1
• Betacellulin (BTC)
• Estrogens (particularly Estrone Sulfate)
• Precursors of Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)

4) Milk has a very high calcium/magnesium ratio and may contribute to some micronutrient imbalances. 

Unfortunately, there is no comparison of Cordain's list of traits between raw milk and conventional pasteurized milk, so we don't know how much of a difference raw milk can make.  As you will read in our next installment, raw milk makes all the difference in the quality and potential nutrition of the milk. 


So now you know the argument against dairy.  Personally, I play with dairy in my diet, adding in quality sources and indulgences now and then, and I routinely use raw, grass-fed butter.  But I have tried the N=1 dose and response test after eliminating dairy from my diet, so I know my limitations and that I definitely do have a reaction to dairy, some forms more than others.  We'll talk more about that in our next installment, which answers the question: Can You Be Healthy WITH Milk?

Bottom line: You don't NEED milk to be healthy, even as a kid AS LONG AS you are eating your vegetables and a healthy, balanced diet of meat (and fat) and veggies (and some fruit).  How counter-culture is that?

What To Drink Part 1: What's Wrong with Juice?

I'm taking a break from the D to discuss all the hubbub about drinks lately.  Have you heard it?  There's a soda tax being debated by politicians.  There's also a stink about flavored (Read: sweetened) milk served in schools and whether or not sports drinks are good for everyone, even after exercise.  Even kombucha has been pulled from the shelves in most supermarkets.  And is fruit juice really healthy like we all thought?  Let's start sipping this topic!


What's Wrong with Juice?


You have probably already read my post Just Say No...To Juice?, but if you haven't now's your chance.  Basically, the problem with juice is that it is too concentrated--you just can NOT eat enough fruit to get the equivalent amount of sugar that is in juice--you'd get sick!  And don't kid yourself, fructose is a sugar, just like high fructose corn syrup, just like table sugar, just like stevia.  They all set things in motion in your body that prepare it for the highly concentrated burst of energy your body knows comes with sweet foods.  It doesn't matter if they are "zero" calorie or low glycemic, sugar and its various forms set the fat storage switch to ON, storing excess carbohydrate as fat.  And unfortunately, fructose isn't like glucose; it doesn't precipitate a surge of insulin that triggers leptin (the hunger hormone) to tell your brain you are full.  From my previous post:

The short story: there is a deadly cycle of fructose leading to fat storage and telling your brain you are still hungry.  For example, fructose has the opposite effect of glucose on the hypothalamus section of the brain controlling feeding behavior.  While blood glucose levels are sensed by the brain and signal a secession to eating, fructose bypasses this metabolic step and actually promotes food intake to continue instead of signaling an end to eating.  

Even the USDA agrees that juice isn't all the "healthy" it's cracked up to be.  In their new guidelines (new and NOT improved, unfortunately) here is their conclusion (page D1-23+) about juice: 

Limited and inconsistent evidence suggests that for most children, intake of 100 percent fruit juice is not associated with increased adiposity, when consumed in amounts that are appropriate for age and energy needs of the child. However, intake of 100 percent juice has been prospectively associated with increased adiposity in children who are overweight or obese. 

Can you say wishy-washy?  But the message stands: juice isn't the best beverage for everyone.  Especially kids.  While their activity levels may be through the roof, it's still not enough to burn those excess calories juice provides.  Keep reading for more on exercise.


But isn't juice made for kids safe?  Isn't it made with their needs in mind?  No.  Check out the worst "kids drink" from The Most Harmful Drinks in America:

Tropicana Tropical Fruit Fury Twister (1 bottle, 20 fl oz)

340 calories

0 g fat

60 g sugars

Sugar Equivalent: Two 7-ounce canisters Reddi-wip

Don’t let Tropicana’s reputation for unadulterated OJ lead you to believe that the company is capable of doing no wrong. As a Pepsi subsidiary, it’s inevitable that they’ll occasionally delve into soda-like territory. The Twister line is just that: a drink with 10 percent juice and 90 percent sugar laced with a glut of artificial flavors and coloring. You could actually save 200 calories by choosing a can of Pepsi instead.

Drink This Instead!

Honest Kids Tropical Tango Punch (1 pouch, 6.75 fl oz)

40 calories

0 g fat

10 g sugars

Um, I think I'll go with water instead.  Thanks!  But scroll through that list of Most Harmful Drinks for some eye-opening beverages you probably once enjoyed too!


Here's more on Tropicana Twister:

Product Details:

Flavored Juice Beverage from Concentrate. With Fruit Force energy releasing B Vitamins! Contains 10% juice.

Ingredients:

Filtered Water, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Apple Juice Concentrate, Grape Juice Concentrate, Citric Acid, Pineapple Juice Concentrate, Natural Flavors, Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C), Pectin, Cherry Juice Concentrate, Sodium Citrate, Red 40, Niacin and Pantothenic Acid.

Not only do you have concentrated natural fructose but added high fructose corn syrup.  Can you say diabetes in a bottle?  Still think juice is healthy?  Okay, you're probably thinking 100% juice is a world away from fruit punches and juice drinks.  Is it really?  Let's look into it. 


Are Fruit and Juice Interchangeable?


No.  But the USDA thinks so.  In their Food Pyramid, one serving of fruit is one cup of fruit OR one cup of fruit juice.  Here is just a few reasons why this is bad:

• The Sugar

We already discussed the sugar content of juice far exceeds that of whole fruit.  Would it surprise you that it also EXCEEDS that of SODA?  According to this chart from Hooked on Juice comparing 100% fruit juice to Coca-cola, apple juice, grape juice, and cherry juice all EXCEED the total teaspoons of sugar, total carbohydrate, and total calories of Coca-cola in the same 12oz serving (and OJ wasn't lagging far behind).  OMG, I have to say it again, it is so shocking: juice has more sugar than soda!

• The Fat

But juice is zero fat, you say?  Once absorbed by your digestive tract, fructose goes to the liver, where it replenishes energy stores.  Any excess energy is converted into fat (don't kid yourself, you are NOT using all that energy).  Conversion of excess fructose into triglycerides elevates the fatty acids circulating in your blood, necessitating fat storage.   And fructose is more readily metabolized into fat than glucose, so it's the bad-est of the bad.  We also know that elevated triglycerides are associated with cardiovascular disease.  And you don't have to be obese to have a heart attack--those pesky triglycerides can accumulate in anyone, thick or thin.  

•  The Metabolic Derangement

Metabolic syndrome leading to diabetes, heart disease, and stroke is associated with insulin resistance and these signs: abdominal obesity, elevated triglycerides, impaired fasting glucose, high blood pressure, low HDL, fatty liver, elevated uric acid, and systemic inflammation (amongst others).  Fructose intake is related to each of those and insulin resistance itself.  While the amount of fructose you ingest needs to be substantial for these problems to surface, do most of us really know how much we are consuming?  Most people on a processed diet are getting fructose from multiple sources since it is the sweetener of choice among manufacturers.  All those sources can DEFINITELY add up.  If you are on a whole foods diet, you are definitely much safer.  But why drink juice then if you can have the whole fruit and get so many more benefits (i.e. fiber, vitamins, minerals) from going to the source?

• The Risk of Cancer  

Inflammation may be a precursor to some cancers, and since we have already established that fructose can lead to inflammation, it follows that high fructose consumption can set the stage for cancer.  For example, this study illustrates the fructose-cancer link and even found that juice intake had a significant association with pancreatic cancer.    

Not only does fructose set up the right conditions, but it also provides the fuel for the fire.  Ever hear the saying "cancer loves sugar"?  According to research like this, cancer cells have a sweet tooth too.  Cancer cells require amino acids and glucose for cell growth.  And fructose is converted into glucose in the liver.  If you starve your body of sugar, cancer cells will still force your body to produce its own sugar, BUT you aren't feeding the cancer, either.  That is why some cancer therapy diets focus on the elimination of all sources of sugar.  In combination with medical treatment, it can be very successful.  So fight cancer with your diet, don't feed it.  Pretty revolutionary!  

• The Hunger

Fructose by-passes the normal metabolic step turning off your hunger; instead, it just makes you hungrier.  It may even break your appetite control mechanism by inducing leptin (the hormone that tells your brain you're full) resistance.   

• The Ease of OD

It is quicker and easier to drink calories than to eat them, so you can easily go overboard on juice. 

• The Processing

Processed juice loses its nutritional value, especially its quantity of vitamin C, with exposure to high temperature, exposure to light (through clear containers), and long shelf life.  

• The Damage to your Teeth

Juice can lead to cavities, just like any other sugar.  For example, "bottle caries" are cavities that result from letting children suck on bottles (of juice or milk) while sleeping. 

• The Waste

It's wasteful.  Think of all the packaging required for an apple or orange or even a container of berries.  Now compare that with a box/can/carton/bottle of juice.  Think of all the oil required to process fruit into juice, create the packaging, package the juice, and transport it.  Which has more environmental impact?

Is a cup of juice still a cup of fruit?

What about Juice for Energy-Refueling after Exercise? 


Short answer: it's not ideal.  There are much better means.  Juice and fructose in general isn't a great post-workout (PWO) energy refuel because, according to Robb Wolf:

Fructose has a nasty habit of up-regulating hepatic GLUCOSE uptake. So not only does the fructose preferentially fill liver glycogen, spuring fat gain, but it partitions glucose into the same fate. Hence my PWO meal of chicken breasts and yams.

and in his Post WO Nutrition post:

Fruit should be used sparingly in this meal if one is focused on optimized glycogen repletion as fructose refills liver glycogen first, and once liver glycogen is full we up-regulate the lipogenic activity of the liver and start down the road towards fat gain and insulin resistance. 

And don't think you could actually burn off that Jamba Juice smoothie or that you are just replenishing your energy after a workout.  Unfortunately, exercise alone is NOT enough to burn the calories you consume.  Science Daily just reported on the EarlyBird Diabetes Study on children in the UK that shows "physical activity had no impact on weight change."  The article suggests that physical activity plays LITTLE IF ANY role in childhood obesity.  If active little kids can't burn off their poor diets with exercise, think us adults have a chance?


TIME magazine ran a piece a year ago called Why Exercise Won't Make You Thin.  Basically, we tend to reward ourselves after working out or feel like we have a free pass to eat poorly the rest of the day.  And exercise may create an energy deficit that makes us hungry, which is counter-productive to weight loss goals.  Their conclusion:

In short, it's what you eat, not how hard you try to work it off, that matters more in losing weight. 

Of course, I totally disagree with the article's attack on exercise, but the message still stands.  Exercise must go hand in hand with NUTRITION to get the results you seek.  Exercise is NECESSARY and leads to a fitter, healthier you, but don't think it alone can determine your health.  And we certainly can't use exercise as an excuse to eat poorly.  Maybe it works for Top Chef host Padma, who can spend her life in the gym and doesn't mind looking skeletal, but it's NOT for most of us.  We need exercise AND a healthy diet.  The base of OUR pyramid is nutrition: 

 Thanks CrossFit Peachtree!

So Why Is Juice Still Being Served in Schools?


Almost NO one sees juice as a problem!  It still has the healthiness glaze about it.  Juice is still thought of as a health food drink.  And with Jamba Juice stepping up to offer its smoothies in school just as sodas are being banned left and right, it's no wonder juice is still the "healthy" alternative.  Unfortunately, as we discussed above, that is NOT the case.  Kids (and adults) are much better off eating the whole fruit, NOT drinking the juice.  Juice should be the last ditch effort to suck down some vitamins when you are in a serious bind--NOT the daily accompaniment to our meals.  


The good news?  Legislation is moving that will limit juice consumption at daycare facilities in California and North Carolina.  At least some people are connecting the dots between childhood obesity and too much sugar, even from a supposedly "benign" source like juice.   And more and more schools are banning sugared drinks, which gets rid of the sugared juices too.  But not the 100% juices.  Why don't we make whole fruits more available and exchange those servings of fruit juice for the real thing?


And for all of our concerns over proper hydration, what is wrong with water?  Why can't kids use the water fountains?  For all the toxicity and contamination fears with tap water, there are just as many with the cultivation and processing of juice.  I'd rather drink the water. 


Why does it really matter in the whole scheme of things?


We are getting fatter as a species.  Childhood obesity is at an all-time high.  If there was nothing to lose from downing a little sugar, then there wouldn't be an issue.  But there is.  There is our future to lose.  If we set our kids up with solid nutrition and nutritional knowledge NOW, we are giving them the best legacy we can provide.  Give them a love and appreciation for real food, whole food, and slow food that doesn't come out of a box, can, carton, or bottle.  


Bottom line: Use water to hydrate and use whole fruit to get your juice!


Keep reading the on-going series for more about the best beverages!


Next up: What's Wrong With Milk?


ANOTHER KEY REFERENCE
Fructose, Insulin Resistance, and Metabolic Dyslipidemia