Without attempting to generate a
detailed debate, I would like to introduce a comment on the very interesting
treatise posted at the identified url. The information/claims posted are
compelling----if taken at face value and devoid of explanations of
surrounding circumstance. We are not totally without some knowledge
relative to the characters and use of milk in the human diet.
I do not contest the findings that A1
and A2 protein fractions do occur as stated, relative to the different
cattle breeds.....but do question the implication that the EXISTENCE of A1,
alone, is the central cause of the diabetic presentations.
Some years ago, stimulated by the works
of Dr. William Douglas Campbell ("The Milk of Human Kindness ---Is Not
Pasteurized"), we inaugurated some investigations of our own and were
shocked to discover how much difference exists in the usefulness between
Unprocessed Raw Milk and the substance marketed under the Pasteurized
Banner. My question is......Did the researchers involved utilize ONLY
pastuerized milk in their investigations? If so, I would strongly suspect
their results would be measureably skewed-----and possibly generating an
undeserved indictment against cattle breeds that have NO control over how
their milk is treated after its collection. My comments are stimulated,
primarily, by a knowledge that ALL pastuerized milk has undergone
modifications rendering it "marginal" as a useful food product. So much
propaganda has been generated about the usefulness of pastuerization, it is
almost impossible for the truth to gain an audience. The countervailing
evidence is both large and impressive, but this is not the forum for such
extensive documentation.
It is a demonstrable fact that pastuerized milk contains
only 10% of its essential (for proper digestion) enzymes:
fat globule fractionization changes absorption
characteristics....radically; the 10 essential unsaturated fats are ALL
altered by the high heat; many of the fat-soluble vitamins are unstable and
damaged by heat above blood temperature (causing losses as great as 66% of
Vit. C. Water-soluble vitamins are degraded by as much as 38% to 80%. The
greatest fiction relating to the advantage of Pastuerization over Raw
Certified Milk, lies in the declared ADVANTAGES of pastuerization over Raw
Certified Milk. For an eye-opener, consult Dr. Douglass's book (ref.
above), page starting on page 66 (e.g. 100,000 bacteria per ml allowable for
pastuerized milk......only 10,000 per ml for Raw Certified Milk. The legal
requirements for Raw Certified Milk (including cleanliness---Daily for
RCM.....twice a month for pastuerized) and the near-absence of same.....for
pastuerized products.....are shameful. The advantages in nutrition and fat
utilization and synthesis products [ESPECIALLY protein metabolization], are
quite pronounced.
The preceeding diatribe leads me to my central point: I
wonder if the same results posted relative to the incidence of Type I
diabetes would continue to prevail.....if unpastuerized Raw Certified Milk
was a player in the evaluations. Personally, I suspect they would be
different. One reason, alone, is sufficient for me to question the
exclusivity of the published findings----it is a documentable fact that many
adult persons (around 80%) exhibit some--or very pronounced---digestive
insufficiency/reaction to most commercially-available milk (pastuerized),
while evidence exists this figure falls to the region of 1% to 2% for raw
milk (the digestion-enabling enzymes are still present). A majority of most
human babies under 2 years of age, display the ability to digest cow's milk
(even pastuerized)......unhindered by alimentary complication (however, they
loose this ability around 3 years of age).
I discourage list members from demanding citings and/or
peer-reviewed literature references (I am too fatigued for such labors). If
my comments are unacceptable, just consider them the "incoherent ramblings"
of an elderly intellect.
Ivan, you are to be commended for your inquiring mind
and generosity in sharing the results with others.
Best Regards,
Brooks.
p.s. I have a similar proclivity for resisting "steam-rollering" among the
commercially-dominated food industry, that Mike seems to have with the
ruling political junta.
Ivan Anderson wrote:
> The correlation between drinking milk containing the A1 protein, heart
> disease, and type 1 diabetes seems very strong. Perhaps now the
> tenuous link between cholesterol, saturated fat, and heart disease can
> be severed. If saturated fat loses its unhealthy status hopefully the
> public will abandon unsaturated fat, or at least get a measure of
> protection from its oxidation in vivo, and the general health will
> rise.
>
> I know the linked article comes from a vested interest, but it is
> possibly the most concise précis of past and current studies.
>
> Regards
> Ivan.
>
> from:
> http://www.a2corporation.com/html/pdf/The%20Future%20of%20Milk.pdf
>
> ...Statistical stu
--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com
Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@eskimo.com>
