Philosophical Vegan Forum

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:08 am
But milk hasn't been linked to much of what you just cited, in fact, in the case of colon cancer dairy consumption *reduces* colon cancer risk. Though there are some associations between milk consumption and certain reproductive cancers.

Do you dispute all of the studies mentioned in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czm6oBxa6dM&t=14s

I would love to see who funded the studies you refer to.

Jebus wrote: ↑Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:41 pm I don't understand why orange juice (or orange milk) is not in the same category. Why is every white drink classified as "milk"?

I don't know, maybe that's racist...

Jebus wrote: ↑Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:18 am Do you dispute all of the studies mentioned in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czm6oBxa6dM&t=14s

I would love to see who funded the studies you refer to.

That appears to be a video that cherry picks research, that is a tactic of those promoting pseudo-science.

There are a number of studies that have looked at dairy and all-cause mortality and they haven't found any consistent relationship, that is why you won't find a single major health organization demonizing dairy like you're doing here. The only groups that do that are those promoting vegan or plant-based diets. I could cite studies if you'd like, but really there are a lot of them and what matters are systematic reviews of the entire literature and not cherry picking studies.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 12:15 am That appears to be a video that cherry picks research, that is a tactic of those promoting pseudo-science.

There are a number of studies that have looked at dairy and all-cause mortality and they haven't found any consistent relationship, that is why you won't find a single major health organization demonizing dairy like you're doing here. The only groups that do that are those promoting vegan or plant-based diets. I could cite studies if you'd like, but really there are a lot of them and what matters are systematic reviews of the entire literature and not cherry picking studies.

I think you need to ask yourself a few questions:

Does the dairy industry ever fund political campaigns?
Can you think of any governments that have a history of subsidizing the dairy industry?
Is lactose intolerance something extremely rare? Is lactose intolerance something that has been spread by those promoting pseudo science?
Was the relevant research funded and/or carried out by an independent group such as the Harvard School of Medical Health or by a group who has a financial interest in the outcome, such as the Dairy Research Institute?


I suggest you have a look at this study: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/a ... 0040005#s3

Jebus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:59 am Does the dairy industry ever fund political campaigns?
Can you think of any governments that have a history of subsidizing the dairy industry?
Is lactose intolerance something extremely rare? Is lactose intolerance something that has been spread by those promoting pseudo science?
Was the relevant research funded and/or carried out by an independent group such as the Harvard School of Medical Health or by a group who has a financial interest in the outcome, such as the Dairy Research Institute?

You seem to be trying to infer some sort of conspiracy theory. But the vast majority of large studies done in nutrition and health are independently funded and there is no major health or medical group (government or independent) that makes the claims you are making about dairy. As I said before, its only groups that promote vegan or plant-based diets that demonize dairy in the way you are here.

In any case, the "dairy industry" markets their products just like other large industries market their products and this would include lobbying. For example, its not the work of vegan advocates that have popularized almond milk but instead the marketing efforts of the California Almond Board. I'm not sure why you're mentioning lactose intolerance, populations of people that have traditionally consumed dairy have low rates of lactose intolerance.

I find on matters of health vegans tend to be rather inconsistent. For example while the high saturated fat content in dairy is a concern so are refined carbohydrates and the two seem to be pretty equally problematic health wise, yet vegans don't typically demonize refined carbohydrates but instead regularly consume them.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:27 amYou seem to be trying to infer some sort of conspiracy theory.

I was trying (but obviously failed) to help you understand why government agencies still promote cow milk as something healthful despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

carnap wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:27 amI find on matters of health vegans tend to be rather inconsistent. For example while the high saturated fat content in dairy is a concern so are refined carbohydrates and the two seem to be pretty equally problematic health wise, yet vegans don't typically demonize refined carbohydrates but instead regularly consume them.

I've never heard a vegan claim that refined carbohydrates are healthful, and I've never heard a vegan compare the harm of such to saturated fat in dairy. ? Perhaps you have lots of conversations with vegans about refined carbohydrates? Do you believe that vegans consume more refined carbohydrates than non-vegans?

Most of the well known vegan health advocates never speak about the components of different foods. Dr. (Colin) Campbell has said that the uncountable interactions between different food components will take hundreds of years to figure out. Instead, he prefers to look at whether or not a particular whole food is healthful or not.

By the way, regional differences in lactose intolerance have been attributed to ethnicity rather than dairy consumption, as you claim.

Jebus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:59 am I was trying (but obviously failed) to help you understand why government agencies still promote cow milk as something healthful despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

This is the conspiracy theory, the "dairy industry" has somehow managed to influence the world's governments, the world's universities and the world's health groups despite being a relatively small industry.

Whenever a group decides to believe something that goes against the scientific/medical community they tend to promote some sort of conspiracy theory. You see the keto/paleo group do the same thing about saturated fat, they cherry pick studies and ignore the systematic reviews by the world's top universities and medical researchers.

Jebus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:59 am I've never heard a vegan claim that refined carbohydrates are healthful, and I've never heard a vegan compare the harm of such to saturated fat in dairy. ? Perhaps you have lots of conversations with vegans about refined carbohydrates?

Many vegans (and non-vegans) think refined carbohydrates are fine health wise. But that wasn't my point, my point is that vegans often will run around demonizing dairy foods health-wise while eating a large portion of refined carbohydrates. There is a persistent belief among vegans that a food being vegan somehow makes it healthier than a non-vegan version and I think this belief leads to really sub-optimal dietary behavior.

Jebus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:59 am Instead, he prefers to look at whether or not a particular whole food is healthful or not.

I mostly agree, but its precisely this sort of research on dairy that has failed to show any significant issue with dairy. As I mentioned before, while milk consumption does seem to increase your risk of reproductive cancers it reduces risk of others like colon cancer. When you study the overall impact of a whole food you get to look at the net positive and negative impact the food has on health.

But Campbell isn't consistent, his primary research on rats took an isolated protein from dairy and looked at its impact on cancer.

Jebus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:59 am By the way, regional differences in lactose intolerance have been attributed to ethnicity rather than dairy consumption, as you claim.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but the gene for lactose persistence is an adaptation seen in populations that have traditionally consumed dairy. There are associations with ethnicity but that isn't the real issue, its whether your ancestral diet included dairy or not. For example East Asians did not make widespread use of milk so they have low rates of this gene while Northern Europeans made heavy use of dairy and have very high rates of the gene.

cornivore wrote: ↑Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:34 am One thing that can be harmful between bovine secretions and rice milk is arsenic (especially if contaminated water gets into the milk).

This [study] suggests that both components of reconstituted formula—the powder and the water with which it is mixed—can be sources of arsenic exposure for formula-fed infants. Conversely, breast milk has been found to have relatively low concentrations of arsenic, even in women with high exposure via their drinking water.—Estimated Exposure to Arsenic in Breastfed and Formula-Fed Infants

The EPA likewise said that bovine milk does not contain as much arsenic from cows ingesting it in particular, however this does not keep it from being more concentrated in an infant formula that is bovine based. "The most commonly used infant formulas contain purified cow's milk whey and casein as a protein source". Another study reports that some of this depends on how much arsenic a cow ingests though: "In the experiments with lactating dairy cows, significantly higher levels of arsenic in milk were observed for cows fed either 3.2 or 4.8 mg of arsenic per kilogram of body weight from arsanilic acid or 3-nitro ".

Also, mycotoxins in plant beverages can be reduced through cooking, possibly during production, whereas they cannot be reduced at all through pasterurization or cooking with cows milk.

Aflatoxins decompose at temperatures of 237–306°C (Rustom, 1997); therefore, pasteurization of milk cannot protect against AFM1 contamination. Awasthi et al. (2012) reported that neither pasteurization nor boiling influenced the level of AFM1 in bovine milk. However, boiling corn grits reduced aflatoxins by 28% and frying after boiling reduced their levels by 34–53%. Aflatoxins: A Global Concern for Food Safety, Human Health and Their Management

"Data show that there is a seasonal trend in the levels of mycotoxins in milk, with these being higher in the cold months probably due to the prolonged storage required for the cattle feeds providing favorable conditions for fungal growth.": Mycotoxins in Bovine Milk and Dairy Products: A Review

Keep in mind that bovine milk is plant milk, because cows are fed plants, and apparently the toxins in such plant feed are present in cow milk. What makes dairy worse, as far as this goes, is that the toxins are harder to remove from milk than the plant foods, when prepared for human consumption. Rice for example can have its arsenic levels reduced by 60% if cooked in excess water and drained, whereas cows are fed things like rice bran, which is not prepared this way, so their milk may contain more arsenic from rice than rice milk would, if prepared carefully. I wouldn't presume that anything is prepared carefully though. High levels of arsenic have been found in rice milk and rice bran, so either type of milk should be avoided for that matter (rice gets more attention for arsenic content, but maybe they should have to list what the cows ate as ingredients in milk too, because it's in there—yes, it isn't just that you are what you eat, it's that you are what you ate eats—you are an ateeat)!

Adding to this, I was checking out some more info (mostly from the World Health Organization), which indicates that cow's milk would be a reservoir for contaminants, health concerns, etc... this is to a greater extent or potential than so-called plant milks, because such things accumulate in the animal milk fat.

Chemical Composition, Metals Content and Pesticide Residues in Raw, Pasteurized and UHT Milk and Their Dietary Intake:

Milk is one of the basic foods which is liable to be contaminated by toxic substances, such as heavy metals and pesticides.

These elements in milk are of particular concern because milk is largely consumed by infants and children.

Dioxins and their effects on human health:

Dioxins are highly toxic and can cause reproductive and developmental problems, damage the immune system, interfere with hormones and also cause cancer. Dioxins are found throughout the world in the environment and they accumulate in the food chain, mainly in the fatty tissue of animals. More than 90% of human exposure is through food, mainly meat and dairy products, fish and shellfish.

Evaluation of Dioxin in U.S. Cow's Milk:

Milk fat is likely to be among the highest dietary sources of exposure to persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) contaminants, thus it is important to understand PBT levels in milk.

Learn about Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):

PCBs have been demonstrated to cause a variety of adverse health effects. They have been shown to cause cancer in animals as well as a number of serious non-cancer health effects in animals, including: effects on the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, endocrine system and other health effects. Studies in humans support evidence for potential carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects of PCBs. The different health effects of PCBs may be interrelated. Alterations in one system may have significant implications for the other systems of the body. The potential health effects of PCB exposure are discussed in greater detail below...

Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs):

PCBs accumulate in human adipose tissue and breast milk.

The levels of PCBs found in different foodstuff are:

•animal fat: 20 to 240 µg/kg

•cow's milk: 5 to 200 µg/kg

•butter: 30 to 80 µg/kg

•fish: 10 to 500 µg/kg, on a fat basis. Certain fish species (eel) and fish products (fish liver and fish oils) may contain much higher levels, up to 10 mg PCBs/kg

•vegetables, cereals, fruits, and a number of other products: <10 µg/kg

•Main causes of concern regarding PCBs are: large fish, shellfish, marine mammals, meat, milk, and other dairy products.

Diet, nutrition and chronic diseases in context:

Consumption of formula instead of breast milk in infancy has also been shown to increase diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure in later life... current evidence indicates adverse effects of formula milk on cardiovascular disease risk factors; this is consistent with the observations of increased mortality among older adults who were fed formula as infants.

Report on Carbon Footprint Due to Milk Formula:

If all the immense resource costs of formula feeding were properly accounted for, the baby food industry would be closed down, and mothers paid to breastfeed.

Guidelines on food fortification with micronutrients:

As the vitamin C content of cow’s milk is low, infants represent a further subgroup that is potentially highrisk for vitamin C deficiency. There have been a number of reports – across several world regions – of scurvy in infants fed on evaporated cow’s milk.

Chernobyl: the true scale of the accident:

Residents who ate food contaminated with radioactive iodine in the days immediately after the accident received relatively high doses to the thyroid gland. This was especially true of children who drank milk from cows who had eaten contaminated grass. Since iodine concentrates in the thyroid gland, this was a major cause of the high incidence of thyroid cancer in children.

Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides and Veterinary Drugs:

Residues in processed dairy commodities with higher fat content than milk will have a higher residue level in the processed commodity than in the raw product for fat-soluble substances.

Toxicological evaluation of certain veterinary drug residues in food:

Several studies have indicated that IGF I concentrations in human serum could be associated with nutritional status and milk intake. Milk consumption is particularly shown to be associated with an increase in concentrations of IGF I in plasma in both the young and adults.

In an intervention study, when men aged 55 85 years were instructed to drink three servings of nonfat or 1% milk per day as part of their normal diet, IGF I concentrations in serum increased significantly (10%) in the intervention group by the end of the 12 week intervention period compared with concentrations in those who maintained their normal diet.

High levels of circulating insulin-like growth factor-I increase prostate cancer risk:

Our data add further support for IGF-I as an etiologic factor in prostate cancer and indicate that circulating IGF-I levels measured at a comparatively young age may be most strongly associated with prostate cancer risk.

Relationship between Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 in diabetic mother’s breast milk and the blood serum of their babies:

There is evidence that the increased action of IGF-1 is likely in the offspring of diabetic mothers and represents part of the mechanism of fetal overgrowth.

Environmental rather than genetic fetal overgrowth:

Metabolic (environmentally induced) macrosomia is distinguished from genetic or constitutional macrosomia and is defined as the growth of a fetus beyond its genetic potential. It is characterized by excessive fat accumulation during fetal life.

Milk consumption during pregnancy increases birth weight, a risk factor for the development of diseases of civilization:

Current dietary recommendations for pregnant women intend to assure sufficient supply of calcium and high quality proteins for the growing fetus. However, there is more and more concern about milk’s role as a source of calcium. According to the recent opinion of Harvard School of Public Health milk isn’t the only, or even best, source of calcium. There are non-dairy foods including leafy green vegetables, broccoli, beans and tofu that supply high amounts of calcium. These calcium-rich food alternatives have a significant advantage in comparison to milk: they do not overstimulate mTORC1 signaling and most importantly do not transfer biologically active exosomal microRNAs.

We appeal to the medical community to define save upper limits for milk consumption during pregnancy, especially for those women who enter gravity with increased BMI.

Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men:

A higher consumption of milk in women and men is not accompanied by a lower risk of fracture and instead may be associated with a higher rate of death.

Apparently the overconsumption of dairy milk is of particular concern at all ages (even prior to birth), and could be dangerous to promote drinking exclusively for nutritional benefits, while ignoring the potential for associated health problems. Especially when milkfat is consumed in addition to other animal fats.

Carnap, are you getting tired of your dishonesty? It's rather tedious reading and replying to your nonsense.

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:25 am That isn't true. Firstly my comment was about dairy substitutes as a whole but even in the case of plant-milks most are rather low in protein regardless of fortification.

You are wrong (as per usual). Silk's Protein Nutmilk has got about 10 grams of protein per cup and 15% more calcium, so it actually pacts a bigger punch than dairy milk (which 8 grams protein per cup and only 30% calcium). [Fortified] soy milk is also comparable to dairy milk in nutrition. It has the exact same amount of protein per cup.

Protein Nut Milk Nutrition:

carnap wrote: ↑Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:25 am And there is evidence that dairy has nutritional advantages, dairy is overall more nutritious than most plant-based "milks" and the nutrients have high bio-availability. With US guidelines fortified soy milk is the only alternative that is officially recommended as a substitute.

Provide evidence that cows milk has any nutritional advantage over fortified milks like Soy or Protein Nutmilk. There aren't any "magical nutrients" that can't either can't be added to vegan substitutes, or taken in the form of a multivitamin. Again, your skepticism is baseless.


Almond milk is not considered an appropriate replacement for cows milk amongst vegan dietitians. https://www.vrg.org/nutshell/kids.php Almond milk has a mere 20% of the protein you'll get from a glass of soy milk, and 18% of what you'll get from a glass of cows milk. Stop pretending that we think it is a standalone adequate replacement for dairy, it is not.

Numerous dietitians (non vegan included) echo this sentiment; fortified plant milks, usually soy, are the way to go, and Almond milk is not an adequate standalone replacement. http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchi ... 5p30.shtml


@cornivore addressed the problem of regulation here:

Cornivore wrote:I think that talking about the FDA responding to this as a nurtirional crisis is nonsense, because health supplements and vitamins are not regulated as far as actually containing any of the nutrients they claim to, and the FDA isn't doing anything about making sure those are particularly healthy for people who believe what the labels say. Obviously if anything can be called a "health food" or "healthy", etc., even if it isn't, then it's a stretch to think that milk is even more synonymous with health than the word healthy, or that they consider milk to be the one and only health food in existence. Especially when it had to be fortified with added nutrients to be considered among those foods, and it isn't the only fortified food. The CDC recommends fortified milk alternatives for children too. The game of semantics is probably based on politics and lobbying (like the food pyramid was), because the dairy industry might make more money and abuse that many more cows if nobody else could use the word.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:43 pm You are wrong (as per usual). Silk's Protein Nutmilk has got about 10 grams of protein per cup and 15% more calcium, so it actually pacts a bigger punch than dairy milk (which 8 grams protein per cup and only 30% calcium).

Except this doesn't refute anything I said. Your response here is strange, you seem to be confusing the word "most" with "all". I said most plant-based milks are low in protein, posting about a single instance of a plant-milk doesn't address what I've said.

In any case, the most widely consumed plant-based milk is almond milk which has just 1 gram of protein per serving. Coconut, cashew, rice, etc based "milks" are also low in protein. The protein fortified plant "milks" aren't that popular, probably because the protein fortification makes the taste/texture unpleasant. Soy milk is also not that popular because soy is seen negatively, ironically often by vegans.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:43 pm There aren't any "magical nutrients" that can't either can't be added to vegan substitutes, or taken in the form of a multivitamin. Again, your skepticism is baseless.

There are nutrients that cannot be readily added to vegan substitutes but its also not just about the nutrients themselves but also co-factors that are contained in milk. Nutrients in milk have high bio-availability, that is in part due to the specific form of the nutrients but also because milk contains compounds that increase absorption. This co-factors not only increase absorption of nutrients in milk but also other foods eaten at the same time. Also research on calcium supplementation, which would include heavy fortification, is looking increasingly grim. For example calcium supplementation has been linked to increased rates of heart disease.

The narrow focus on particular nutrients is misplaced, not only are synthetic forms of nutrients metabolized differently than natural ones but nutrients have to actually be absorbed to be utilized. Diets have to be evaluated holistically.

Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:43 pm Stop pretending that we think it is a standalone adequate replacement for dairy, it is not.

Not sure what "we" you're referring to but people are replacing milk with mock milk beverages like almond milk. That includes many vegans as well as non-vegans. Some people (mostly vegans) are also replacing other dairy products like cheese with mock versions as well.

In fact, the entire allure of mock dairy products is that you can eat them in the same cultural context as real dairy products but that is precisely what makes them problematic.