Got Milk? — Get Rid Of It.

[tex]

Hi All,

As many of us have long suspected, the claims made about milk by the dairy lobby over the past half-century or so, and parroted by USDA, the medical community, and self-proclaimed health experts in general, make good advertising hype, but don't hold up in the real world.

After tracking more than 100,000 Swedish men and women for up to 23 years, the study authors saw no link between milk consumption and fracture risk. However, they did find that avid milk drinkers were more likely to die at younger ages than their counterparts who drank little to no milk.

Does milk do a body good? Maybe not, a new study suggests

Why would anyone be surprised at this "discovery", since it has long been known that the countries with the highest milk-consumption rates also have the highest osteoporosis rates. But the "experts" chose to ignore that apparent enigma for years. Note that the article assumes that yogurt is beneficial, despite the problems with milk in general. But is it? I have a hunch that this misconception will survive only until it is shot down by another research study. In reality, making a silk purse out of a sow's ear seems simple and straightforward with all the technology available today, but most of these assumptions only last until someone actually checks out the science behind them, and reports the facts accurately.

Tex

[Zizzle]

They seem to suggest Galactose is the evil component of milk (no mention of casein!):
Never knew it was found in sugar beets too!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactose

Sources
Galactose is found in dairy products, sugar beets, other gums and mucilages. It is also synthesized by the body, where it forms part of glycolipids and glycoproteins in several tissues;

Clinical significance
Chronic systemic exposure of mice, rats, and Drosophila to D-galactose causes the acceleration of senescence (aging) and has been used as an aging model.[9] Two studies have suggested a possible link between galactose in milk and ovarian cancer.[10][11] Other studies show no correlation, even in the presence of defective galactose metabolism.[12][13] More recently, pooled analysis done by the Harvard School of Public Health showed no specific correlation between lactose-containing foods and ovarian cancer, and showed statistically insignificant increases in risk for consumption of lactose at ≥30 g/d.[14] More research is necessary to ascertain possible risks.

Some ongoing studies suggest galactose may have a role in treatment of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (a kidney disease resulting in kidney failure and proteinuria).[15] This effect is likely to be a result of binding of galactose to FSGS factor.[16]

Galactose is a component of the antigens present on blood cells that determine blood type within the ABO blood group system. In O and A antigens, there are two monomers of galactose on the antigens, whereas in the B antigens there are three monomers of glucose.[17]

Alpha-1,3-galactose, or Alpha-Gal for short, has been recognised as a delayed allergy to mammal meat, affecting a growing number of the population. This allergy is initially caused by a tick bite.

[Gabes-Apg]

maybe now they will acknowledge that Vit D3, Magnesium and other key common deficiencies are the reasons for increased osteoporosis....

[Lilja]

This is interesting.

There has been long discussions over many years as to why northern countries, especially Norway, has such a high rate of hip fractures among elders, despite the fact that we are a "milk nation". We have always been told that milk would give us solid bones and protect us from fractures.

I have been convinced that the high rate of hip fractures has all to do with 6 months' lack of sunshine/daylight, IOW lack of vitamin D.

A bit off topic: Swedish scientists studied the benefits of the so called Mediterranan Diet. They found that the healthy mediterannean with low score on cardiovascular diseases had nothing to do with the consumption of olive oil, vegetables, wine and lean meat. It was all thanks to the sun...

Lilja

[Hopeful]

And along the ideas of northern climates and lack of sun, my husband had prostate cancer at 49 (had it removed) and we did a lot of research about recurrence. One really interesting thing that stood out was that the lowest rates of prostate cancer (this was 15 years ago) occurred in Arizona and Florida. If you think about it - this has to be all about the sun. There are proportionately more older men in these 2 states and prostrate cancer is very prevalent (although not usually the cause of death) in older men. So, logically, there should be more incidence in the 2 "retirement" states instead of less...

Now explain to me again why we choose to live in central NY state? If we had more of a next egg we would certainly become "snow birds" in a New York minute!

[Lilja]

Now explain to me again why we choose to live in central NY state? If we had more of a next egg we would certainly become "snow birds" in a New York minute!

Hi Hopeful,
This is as off topic as could be, but guess what? When Norwegians retire they spend all the "dark" months of the year in Canary Islands and Thailand, they either buy or rent a house. Not all of them, but almost all of my retired friends do. I do understand them. It's dark when you get up, and it's dark when you come back from work. In December for instance we have daylight from 9 am till 3 pm. It's depressing.

Where I come from, the northern part of the country, we have like 2-3 hours of daylight from November till February.

But, I'm too much in love with my family and my grandchildren, and too curious to move away from them during winter. Maybe I should start going to sun-studios. According to a well known norwegian professor, our D-vitamin guru Johan Moan, this is not dangerous as long as the sun studios are well managed, have modern equipment and you only stay for 20 min in the sun-bed.

[tex]

Lilja,

Yes, we've been told the same things in this country for many decades. And I certainly agree with you about the benefits of vitamin D. There is no question in my mind that vitamin D is responsible for most of the benefits that you discussed in your post. Milk has been an imposter for many, many years. Vitamin D has actually been doing most of the work, while milk has been claiming the glory that should have gone to vitamin D.


Hopeful,

That's a very insiteful comparison of prostate cancer risks relative to latitude, and how it plays out in the real world. I agree with you about the effects of sunlight (vitamin D) on prostate cancer risk.

To provide some background information, here's a quote from the vitamin D book:

Survivin is well known to cancer researchers, because it is one of the proteins known as "inhibitors of apoptosis proteins" (IAPs). In medical circles, survivin is also known as baculoviral inhibitor of apoptosis repeat-containing 5 (BIRC5). In humans, it's encoded by the BIRC5 gene.

As the descriptive name suggests, these proteins share the distinction of being able to inhibit programmed cell death. Obviously this implies that IAPs are capable of preventing the immune system from destroying cells that are protected by IAPs, and this technique is a primary survival tool used by cancer cells.

"Apoptosis" is the medical term used to describe programed celled death (IOW, apoptosis involves intentional destruction of a human cell by the immune system for a health reason). The bottom line is that by expressing survivin, cancer cells manage to avoid destruction by our immune system so that they are allowed to thrive and multiply.

If you haven't seen this research you may find this interesting (again, from the book):

Vitamin D works synergistically with testosterone to down-regulate survivin.
Research data related to prostate cancer that shows that while testosterone has the capacity to slightly down-regulate the expression of survivin, and vitamin D also has that capability, the combination of the 2 hormones creates a very synergistic down-regulation of the BIRC5 gene, resulting in a significantly-reduced level of survivin in prostate cancer patients (Wang, Chatterjee, Chittur, Welsh, & Tenniswood, 2011).27

Here is reference number 27 from that quote:

Effects of 1α,25 dihydroxyvitamin D3 and testosterone on miRNA and mRNA expression in LNCaP cells

Here's my interpretation of the implications of that research (sort of thinking out loud, FWIW):

Will the discovery of a synergistic effect between vitamin D and testosterone affect the way that prostate cancer is treated in the future?
Interestingly, traditional prostate cancer treatments typically include measures to lower testosterone levels in the body (called androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] or androgen suppression therapy), because conventional medical wisdom says that testosterone promotes cancer growth. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for these well-established treatment practices to be altered to incorporate the use of vitamin D in order to induce a synergistic effect with testosterone to suppress survivin levels in prostate cancer patients. Not only should this combination help to prevent the development of prostate cancer, but with survivin suppressed, the immune system should be able to kill existing cancer cells as part of its normal functionality.

Tex

[Hopeful]

Lilja - I thought that we had it tough in the winter with daylight only from 8 am until 4 pm! I don't know how you tolerate it but I hear what you're saying about the grandkids. Maybe if we just went away for a month?

I know, let's have an MC convention somewhere warm with only our special foods, great conversation, and healing modalities available for all. Tex can be the keynote speaker. We can have talks on medications/supplements, cooking classes, etc. I'd come!

Tex, I need to get the Vit. D book. Just putting it off until after the election (I'm running for Town Board). Once a Type A, always a Type A, apparently...

[Martha]

Let's have that convention on a warm Caribbean island. We can rent a villa and hire cooks to cater to our special diets, and hang out on the beach to get lots of vitamin D. Anybody know a billionaire?

[Hopeful]

Imagine being able to talk in person with all our forum friends and getting some healing R&R - heaven!

[Lilja]

Hi Tex,

I wonder if you have some information, or has it been discussed at the board, as to why most of the board members are women?

Is it because MC more often hits women, and if so, why?
Is it because women are more interested in finding out more about their health issues, while men suffer in silence?

If this has been discussed earlier, I would like to find out where.

If not, maybe you could open a new thread on the subject?

Lilja

[nerdhume]

OK, my WAEG is that women get this more because we tend to take more medications and see the dr. more often. A link between NSAIDs, antibiotics, etc has been established. Men (my DH for instance) will only take an aspirin if he is in severe pain. To get him to go to the dr is a battle. Whereas women (myself for instance) are used to needing mydol etc from the teenage years up

[tex]

Hi Lilja,

IMO, Theresa has hit the nail right square on the head. Because of pregnancy, childbirth, and various other related issues, it does appear that women are more likely to seek medical help when they feel ill. And we all know that when we see a doctor she or he typically reaches for a prescription pad automatically.

And based on my own experience, she is also correct about the reluctance of most men to visit a doctor. Basically, the only times that I have visited a doctor (other than dentists) prior to recent years when my body seems to be falling apart was when I couldn't breathe in enough air to survive (because of an asthma attack), or I was unable to stop severe bleeding, or I had uncontrollable diarrhea that I decided must be due to colon cancer (and even then I put it off for a week or so longer than I should have ). She's right, men just don't go to see a doctor unless they feel that there is no alternative. They will put up with all sorts of health issues rather than to go see a doctor. I suppose it's just human nature.

And the ridiculous part is that if a man should go to see a doctor complaining of uncontrollable diarrhea, and showing obvious symptoms of MC, he is far less likely to be considered at risk of having MC, because the out-of-date medical literature says that MC is a disease of "middle-aged women". Because of that stupid error, younger people and men are far less likely to be diagnosed than older women, because you can't find MC unless you look for it (with colonic biopsies).

When my symptoms were raging, and I finally went to see a doctor, he incorrectly diagnosed me with colon cancer and sent me on to see a GI doc, who agreed with the diagnosis. He put me through just about every test available in the clinic (starting with a sigmoidoscopy, going through several scans, and ending with a colonoscopy), and he never found anything wrong with me. He pronounced me in perfect health (even though I was so sick that I was down to skin and bones). Why? Because he never bothered to take biopsy samples. If I had been a woman he might not have made that mistake.

So basically, IMO, the ignorance of GI specialists is a primary reason why the diagnostic rate of men has been so low. Fortunately that seems to be changing in recent years, as more GI docs realize that their mistakes of the past have been a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But it very likely is true that more women than men develop MC, because of their typically heavier use of medications.

Tex

[Zizzle]

My FIL has a raging case of MC, worse than me, but his irresponsible doctor told him after his colonoscopy that he was fine. "Just a little inflammation" but "nothing to be concerned about." So he sits on the toilet for hours a day, takes ibuprofen for all his aches and pains, and drinks like a fish instead of eating food, because all food makes him sick.

He insists I wouldn't get sick if I didn't know the gluten status of my food. I.e. It's all in my head. He routinely poisons my gluten intolerant MIL with his cooking, using canned broths, hidden soy sauce, etc. Can't wait to visit for Thanksgiving!

I give up.

[Lilja]

Hi Lilja,


But it very likely is true that more women than men develop MC, because of their typically heavier use of medications.

Tex

Thank you :-)

I feared that would be the conclusion. During the four/five years prior to being diagnosed I had at least 5 antibiotic cures. This, together with my psoriasis must be the answer to why I developed CC. My psoriasis however, disappeared as soon as I went GF and DF.

Lilja