--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > wrote: > <snip> > > I'm not a biologist or geneticist but I think that > > 10,000 years is more than enough time for a species > > to select genetic traits. So I think you strengthen > > my point by reminding us that it's "only" been > > 10,000 years that dairy has been a part of the human > > diet. > > In fact, in populations that continued to drink milk > beyond weaning age, there *has* been genetic > adaptation, at least with regard to lactose intolerance. > But dairy has not been part of the human diet universally > by any means since 10,000 years ago, so the gene that > turns off the ability to digest lactose after weaning > persists, in widely varying percentages among groups > with common ancestry (Ashkenazi Jews and others of > Northern European ancestry, for example, have a very > low percentage of lactose intolerance, whereas African > Americans have a very high percentage).
I have no acute negative reactions to dairy, and my genetic background is from dairy consuming regions. But, just because I can digest lactose doesn't mean milk is an ideal food. Milk is mucous forming, and I feel much better without dairy in my diet. I'm also not convinced that humans are fully adapted to eating casein and gluten, which are two of the most problematic agrarian proteins. Again and again, I've read how eliminating gluten and/or casein from the diet has tremendously improved health. I think that although they are generally tolerated, casein and gluten are constant sources of low-level irritation/distress to the physiology that, in the long term, either cause or exacerbate chronic health conditions.
