What's Milk Got? - Health Risks and Environmental Issues
Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, Oct, 2002 by Rose Marie
Williams

The GOT MILK? campaign featuring high profile celebrities sporting
milk mustaches has been a very effective advertising tool in putting
milk in front of the American consumer to reverse a decline in milk
sales. The medical establishment endorses milk as a way to build
strong bodies in children and prevent osteoporosis in later years, due
to the high calcium content. Milk is said to be the "perfect food."
For sure, there is much controversy about the benefits of dairy
products. With great admiration for the enduring research done by
Weston Price, DDS, who believed strongly in the nutritive value of
milk and butter fat, (1) this treatise seeks to take an updated look
at modern dairy production and consumption.

The primitive cultures about which he wrote got their dairy straight
from the cow, unpasteurized and unhomogenized. TJS dairy production in
the 1930s had not yet progressed to the high tech factory farms of
today. Raw milk was readily abundant, with all the beneficial enzymes
intact. Cows grazed on chlorophyll rich grasses nurtured by the sun's
energy. All this has changed.

Today's milk may look the same, even taste the same, but it is quite a
different product. Milk in the US contains myriad drugs, some approved
and others not. Milk contains pesticides from treated grains, bacteria
and pus from infected animals, in some instances - salmonella, and
genetically engineered growth hormones designed to increase milk
production, thereby shortening the life of a dairy cow from an average
of 15 years to three or four. Plastic containers, and plastic wrap may
leach dangerous chemicals into milk and dairy products. There is even
a variable level of radiation in dairy products.

For years the US produced more milk than it could use with the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) subsidizing the industry by
buying up surplus butter, cheese, and non-fat dry milk, much of which
is distributed to our children in school lunch programs. (2)

Ear Infections, Allergies, and More

Every year, about 10 million American children are treated for ear
infections, making this second only to upper respiratory infections
(colds & flu) as the most common illnesses treated by pediatricians.
An infection to the middle ear (otitis media) results when ear
secretions fail to drain properly and build up causing pressure in the
ear to rise often followed by infection. Dairy products thicken and
increase mucus, making it difficult for an infected ear to drain
properly. Antibiotics are the first line of treatment by conventional
medicine. Kids who are treated more frequently with antibiotics appear
to have more infections. Alternative treatments may include keeping
the child well hydrated with water, non-caffeine teas and diluted
fruit juices, and avoiding dairy products. (3)

Besides ear and tonsillar infections, dairy products have been
associated with allergy, sinusitis, headache, congestion, runny nose,
rash/eczema, fatigue, lethargy, irritability, bedwetting, asthma,
intestinal bleeding, colic, childhood diabetes, even bovine leukemia
virus, or AIDS-like virus. (2,4,5) Type 1 diabetes in infants under
six months of age is linked to cow's milk. Finland is the world's
highest dairy consuming country and has the world's highest rate of
insulin dependent diabetes, striking about 40 children per 1000,
compared to approximately seven per 1000 in the United States.
Diabetic children were found to have eight times as many antibodies
against milk protein as did healthy children indicating an autoimmune
disorder. There are over 25 proteins in cow's milk, which can cause
allergic reaction in humans. The body may react to these proteins as
foreign invaders. Iron deficiency anemia in babies is associated with
consumption of cow's milk. Pediatric guidelines now suggest that
infants less th an one year old not be given cow's milk. (5)

Dr. Benjamin Spock, who helped parents raise the postwar generation of
baby boomers, promoted milk's virtues for fifty years. Not only did
milk change dramatically over that span of time, so did Dr. Spock's
opinion of it as a perfect food. His later years were spent raising
public awareness of milk's negative impact on health and declaring it
an unfit food for infants. Noel Bernard, MD, the director of
Physicians for Responsible Medicine, believes humans should not
consume cow's milk, and that serious health problems can result from
the proteins, sugar, fat, and contaminants in milk products. Milk
consumption in adults is associated primarily with heart disease,
arthritis, allergy, sinusitis, leukemia, lymphoma and cancer. (2)

Breast Milk vs Cow's Milk

Many studies indicate breast-fed babies have fewer, and less severe,
illnesses than formula-fed infants, including gastrointestinal
infections, respiratory and ear infections, eczema and asthma. Human
breast milk promotes helpful bacteria that inhibit many
disease-causing bacteria and parasites. Formula-fed babies have
approximately one-tenth the level of bacteria-fighting lactobacillus.
A ten-year follow-up study with premature infants showed the breast
fed children scored ten points higher in IQ tests than the formulated
group. (2)

Cow's milk is three to four times richer in protein than human milk;
it has seven times the mineral content; but is deficient in essential
fatty acids (EFAs) compared to human breast milk. Human milk has six
to ten times as much EFAs, especially linoleic acid. Skimmed milk has
no linoleic acid. Growing calves need massive skeletal growth, while
human infants need important nourishment for brains, spinal cord and
nerves. (4)

All milk is intended to nourish the young of its species. Milk is a
hormonal delivery system designed to regulate growth. A healthy human
infant should double its weight in three months going from seven to
fourteen pounds, whereas a calf is expected to reach 500 pounds in six
months. Milk was designed to be a "perfect food" for the newborn of
each mammalian species. Most species wean their young off milk after
infancy. Humans are the only species that continue consuming milk, and
then choosing milk from a different species entirely. (2) We would
find it absurd to drink chimpanzee milk, a species much closer to our
own, yet custom and habit have made us comfortable with the idea of
consuming cow's milk, a species flagrantly unlike our own. We have
moved so far away from nature's paradigm that we no longer recognize
the absurdity of it all.

Lactose Intolerance

Recent mapping of the human genome has found "the genetic coding
responsible for the inability of most adults to produce lactase, the
enzyme needed to digest lactose, the primary sugar in milk." Infants
produce lactase to help digest mother's milk. The lactase gene cuts
off after weaning, making dairy consumption for many children and
adults a mild to serious problem, which may include allergy, cramps,
diarrhea, bloating, or gas. This genetic feature is found worldwide
and geneticists conclude it must be very old. Therefore, lactose
intolerance should not be classified as a disorder. What is a
departure from the norm is the more recent development of adults of
northern European descent to tolerate lactose. (6)

Pasteurization/Homogenization

Raw milk may be useful for building strong bones and preventing dental
caries, while pasteurization destroys vitamins and interferes with
calcium absorption. Raw milk contains enzymes that assist with
digestion and assimilation of nutrients. Epidemiological studies from
the United Kingdom and Oslo, Norway, implicate pasteurization as a
causative factor in heart disease. A sudden steep rise in coronary
heart disease was observed within two years of introducing high heat
pasteurization. (7)

In the US the consumption of milk products subjected to extensive heat
such as evaporated milk and ice cream doubled from 1931 to 1945, and
so did the consumption of cheese that was pasteurized, processed or
cooked. During this time period deaths from heart disease increased
twelve-fold. Some cultures that rely on dairy, such as the Masai,
Zulu, nomads of Nigeria and Somaliland, and others, preserve their
milk by fermentation and are free of heart disease. (7)

In some instances pasteurization is less than successful in destroying
harmful bacteria and viruses as occurred in Chicago in 1985. A
processing plant incorrectly pasteurized one day's supply of milk,
which resulted in four deaths and 150,000 salmonella poisonings. The
tainted batch of milk might also have contained live leukemia virus,
tuberculosis virus, and a large assortment of other infectious
organisms. "No records were kept to monitor subsequent cases of
encephalitis, meningitis, or leukemia." (2)

Homogenization may increase the risk of arteriosclerotic heart
disease. The enzyme, xanthine oxidase, is present in all milk, and is
digested when raw milk is consumed. Homogenization breaks up the fat
into tiny droplets, which surround and protect the enzyme. It is then
carried into the bloodstream where it produces a chemical that damages
the arteries. Plaque builds up at the injury site, thereby
contributing to atherosclerosis. Even young children in the US are
showing signs of hardening of the arteries. Cultures that consume no
milk products, including the Yemenites, the South Vietnamese, the Atiu
Mitiaro, and the Hunja remain free of arteriosclerotic heart disease.
(7)

Early research conducted on feeding pasteurized and homogenized milk
to cats "caused profound and rapid degeneration in all species
tested." These conclusions have yet to be refuted. (8)

Antibiotics

The meat and dairy industry are the biggest users of antibiotic drugs.
Some 52 known drugs are used to treat mastitis alone. According to
Consumer's Union, only 30 of these drugs have been approved by the US
Food & Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA claims several of the
"illegal" drugs are generic versions of the 30 approved substances.
(2)

Drug residues often go directly into the animal's milk. The milk from
one treated cow can contaminate an entire truckload with drug
residues. A withdrawal time should be observed during which milk is to
be discarded until the drugs pass out of the cow's system, in as much
as four to seven milking periods. That means money down the drain. The
dairy industry is supposed to observe a withdrawal time before
allowing milk from treated cows to reenter the milk pool, but this is
not always done. About one-third of milk products are contaminated
with antibiotic residues. Of the myriad drugs used, the FDA only
requires residue tests for four. (2,4,9)

For some drugs, approved withdrawal times have never been established,
so farmers or veterinarians using these drugs to treat dairy cows
don't know how long milk can be contaminated. Some drugs used in dairy
production are capable, even at low levels, of causing allergic
reactions in a small number of milk drinkers. Milk is the most common
cause of food allergy. Michael Jacobsen, author of Safe Food, suggests
that in some cases the drugs in milk products may prove to be the
offending substances, rather than the milk itself. (9)

The escalating use of drugs in dairy production has been blamed for
the increase in antibiotic resistant bacteria. Some critics believe
that government has done little to protect the public. Some veterinary
drugs such as sulfamethazine along with other sulfa drugs may slightly
increase cancer risk for humans. In spite of repeated assurances by
the FDA that the milk supply is safe, the General Accounting Office
(GAO) has concluded the FDA doesn't really know if it is safe or not.
(9)

Furthermore, toxic pesticides applied to feed grains are absorbed into
the milk as well. Many of these chemicals are fat soluble and mimic
estrogen in the body. They are considered to be hormone and endocrine
disrupters.

Radiation

In 1998 a small group of health and environmental advocates met with
top officials of the New York State Dept. of Health (NYS DOH) to
express concerns regarding the aging Indian Point Nuclear Reactors
(IPP) situated close to the metropolitan areas of New York, New Jersey
and Connecticut. Attempting to assure us that IPP posed no health
risk, one DOH official mentioned that milk is periodically tested for
radiation contamination in New York, and other states as well. Far
from being reassured, we found this news startling! Not one of us had
ever heard this before, nor had we ever heard a radio announcement
about the radiation index for the week's milk supply, like one hears
warnings about the air pollution index. Why isn't the public apprised
of this information? What parent would knowingly give their child
radiation contaminated food? When we questioned the DOH further we
were told the testing had nothing to do with local reactors, they
merely tested for ongoing fallout from other places around the world,
lik e Chornobyl (preferred Ukrainian sp.).

We felt they were not completely upfront about this information
especially after hearing Dr. Helen Caldicott, the Australian
pediatrician and outspoken critic of the nuclear industry, explain how
radioactive particles are regularly emitted from nuclear plants and
precipitate back down with rain, covering fields, farms and backyard
gardens. Cows ingest the contaminated grain, which passes into the
milk. Milk is consumed quickly after reaching market before the
various radioactive particles have broken down. Aged cheese contains
less radioactive contamination because many contaminants have a short
half-life. Cheese aficionados should stick to cheese aged 60 days or
longer.

Historical Summary

1600/1700s -- In colonial days each cow yielded about one quart of
milk per day. Milk was churned into butter and stored to provide
nourishment during the hard lean winters.

1908 -- Pasteurization was introduced to reduce spoilage and bacterial
growth, but also destroys beneficial enzymes.

1919 -- Homogenization prevented separation of fat by breaking fat
into tiny particles where it remains suspended throughout the liquid.

1932 -- Artificially produced Vitamin D was added to milk.

1964 -- Plastic milk containers were commercially introduced.

1994 -- Monsanto Co. develops genetically engineered growth hormone,
referred to as recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) or bovine growth
hormone (BGH) to further boost dairy yield per cow. (2)

Current Consumption

The USDA reports a substantial increase in the use of low fat and skim
milk over whole milk, however, use of milk fat rose "because cheese
consumption soared." Cheese, butter and ice cream are concentrated
forms of milk. A person consuming one pound of milk every day consumes
365 pounds of milk in a year. However, an individual who eats one
pound of cheese, ice cream, or butter daily is actually consuming a
much greater concentration of dairy factors (fat, cholesterol,
pesticides, milk proteins, growth hormones, antibiotics, etc.). It
takes 21.2 lbs. of milk to yield one lb. of butter; ten lbs. of milk
yield one lb. of hard cheese; 12 lbs. of milk yield one lb. of ice
cream; eleven lbs. of milk yield one lb. of non-fat dry milk. The
average amount of dairy products consumed by the average American
totals a startling 932.05 lbs. annual intake. (2) This might be well
over a 1000 lbs. annually factoring in the growing number of Americans
who are avoiding milk.

Dairy products make up a whopping 40% of the American diet, with all
other foods (grains, meats, fruits and vegetables) making up the
balance. Dairy is everywhere on the American scene -- cream cheese or
butter on bagels, cream in coffee, the new lattes, cheeseburgers, milk
shakes, ice cream, buttered toasted cheese sandwiches, tacos with
melted cheese, baked potato with sour cream, and America's favorite
foods -- pizza and cheesecake. In fact, the bulk of New York State
dairy is processed into mozzarella cheese, because of high demand.
There's no denying cheese tastes good, and we love it. But is it good
for us? This topic will be continued in a future article.

References

(1.) Price, Weston, DDS, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, Keats
Pub. Inc., CT, 1989.

(2.) Cohen, Rbt., Milk, the Deadly Poison, Argus Pub. Inc., NJ, 1998.

(3.) "Relief for Ear Infections," Natural Healing Miami Dade Edit.,
June 2002.

(4.) Kradjian, Rbt., MD, The Milk Letter: A Message To My Patients,
www.afpafitness.com/MILKDOC.HTM, Feb. 7, 1999.

(5.) Whitaker, Julian, MD, Health and Healing, vol. 6, No. March 1996.

(6.) "Lactose Intolerance Actually Normal," Sun Sentinel of South FL.,
Feb. 24, 2002,

(7.) Brown, Ellen, JD, Hansen, Richard, DMD, FACAD, The Key To
Ultimate Health, Advanced Health Research, Pub., CA, 2000.

(8.) Health Science Institute, Nov 2002.

(9.) Jacobsen, Michael, at al, Safe Food, Center for Science in the
Public Interest, Living Planet Press, CA, 1991.

COPYRIGHT 2002 The Townsend Letter Group
COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group