Is dairy actually bad for you?

13567

Replies

  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    GailK1967 wrote: »
    You can develop an intolerance or allergy at any time of your life, regardless of whether you've been eating it for years.

    IMO dairy is very tasty, relatively cheap and an easy source of protein for humans but NOT healthy or ideal. No other species goes and sucks on another species once it's weaned so why do we gobble the milk of other animals? The answer is because it's been heavily marketed to us and it tastes great especially with all that other *kitten* added to it. Hence why so many people do develop an intolerance to it at some point.

    We are biologically programmed to eat our own species milk (ie breast milk) until weaning age which should be around 2-6 years of age. After that we have absolutely no evolutionary or biological need for milk.

    In other news, humans are also the only species which use computers, drive cars, have a written language, exchange currency, own televisions, refrigerate/preserve/cook our food, etc.

    That logic is completely invalid.

    Seriously. The answer to the bolded part is simply "because we can". I've seen cattle where one cow is sulking from her mother while her calk is sulking from her. I'm sure if the horse could get in there they would.
  • Sunnybrooke99
    Sunnybrooke99 Posts: 369 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    WHY do we consume cow's and goat's and sheep's milk? Rather obviously because we can and in some areas learned it was a good source of calories and also a way to preserve food (cheese, fermented milk, as well as simply having the animals around for something other than their meat).

    Same reason we farm, even though cats (for one example) cannot, and why we can foods and smoke foods and otherwise preserve foods, even though cats cannot. Cats do other things (like convince us we should care for them).

    Like most animals that do not consume milk after baby-hood, cats become lactose intolerant as adults, but if they were given it regularly they probably would retain the ability to digest it (and this would apply to cow's milk too), and some cats aren't lactose intolerant. I would not give a cat milk, but given all the lore about cats and milk I wonder if back in the day when they were given it more regularly if more did not develop intolerance as adults.

    In any case, we KNOW that humans have developed lactose tolerance as adults (not all, but the vast majority from areas where consuming milk has long been common, which includes north and western Europe). You can even test for the relevant genes if you want to. So saying animals that are lactose intolerant as adults do badly with milk (and would with milk from their own species too) is not a sensible reason to say that humans who ARE lactose tolerant would do badly with it.

    What my boi anth professor told us way that most people have some degree of lactose intolerance. Maybe not enough to make them ill, but enough to cause them some discomfort, or some mostly unnoticed problems to their digestion. I think this article has the number at 61 percent being intolerant. I love cheese, but I treat it like alcohol and eat it in moderation. My boyfriend can chug those expensive full fat yogurts. No fair.

    http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2005/06/lactose-intolerance-linked-ancestral-struggles-climate-diseases

    I suspect that figure is a bit misleading - yes, I can well believe that 61% of the worlds humans have some lactose intolerance.

    But that would be because most asian people are lactose intolerant (as adults) and asian people make up the largest racial group in the world.

    A much lower percentage of caucasian people are lactose intolerant - of course there are some, and it occurs to various degrees and increases in the older population - ie people who were not previously lactose intolerant can develop a degree of it when older.

    If OP is getting symptoms of bloating, bowel issues, nausea etc - then, yes, worth a try of eliminating dairy for a few weeks and see if this helps - even if not previously intolerant.

    But no need for everyone who is tolerating dairy fine, to quit consuming it - either for weight loss or any other biological reason (non-physical ethical choice reasons aside)

    Oh, you are right. I was thinking that Asians count. Gosh, wonder where my half Asian son falls.
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,122 Member
    Try eliminating it and see if you feel better. Dairy is not a requirement for good health. It's optional. So if it causes you problems, ditch it. If it's not causing you problems, enjoy.
  • Sunnybrooke99
    Sunnybrooke99 Posts: 369 Member
    edited October 2017
    Umm ''that asians count' ???? not sure why the need for sarcasm :*

    I meant the figure is misleading in terms of relevance for most posters - it doesnt mean random poster or OP for that matter has a 61% chance of being lactose intolerant.
    that the statement needs to be seen in context of world population, not individual risk.

    I imagine a person who has one asian parent would be more likely to be lactose intolerant - but I don't know exactly how the genetics of this one work, depends if dominant or recessive type gene, not an area i know enough about.

    Is it only Americans here? I still think alot of people are mixed and might be experiencing some degree of lactose intolerance without even really knowing what’s going on. My son loves ice cream, and eats it eventho it makes him barf occasionally. :/ that’s teenaged boys for you.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited October 2017
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    WHY do we consume cow's and goat's and sheep's milk? Rather obviously because we can and in some areas learned it was a good source of calories and also a way to preserve food (cheese, fermented milk, as well as simply having the animals around for something other than their meat).

    Same reason we farm, even though cats (for one example) cannot, and why we can foods and smoke foods and otherwise preserve foods, even though cats cannot. Cats do other things (like convince us we should care for them).

    Like most animals that do not consume milk after baby-hood, cats become lactose intolerant as adults, but if they were given it regularly they probably would retain the ability to digest it (and this would apply to cow's milk too), and some cats aren't lactose intolerant. I would not give a cat milk, but given all the lore about cats and milk I wonder if back in the day when they were given it more regularly if more did not develop intolerance as adults.

    In any case, we KNOW that humans have developed lactose tolerance as adults (not all, but the vast majority from areas where consuming milk has long been common, which includes north and western Europe). You can even test for the relevant genes if you want to. So saying animals that are lactose intolerant as adults do badly with milk (and would with milk from their own species too) is not a sensible reason to say that humans who ARE lactose tolerant would do badly with it.

    What my boi anth professor told us way that most people have some degree of lactose intolerance. Maybe not enough to make them ill, but enough to cause them some discomfort, or some mostly unnoticed problems to their digestion. I think this article has the number at 61 percent being intolerant. I love cheese, but I treat it like alcohol and eat it in moderation. My boyfriend can chug those expensive full fat yogurts. No fair.

    http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2005/06/lactose-intolerance-linked-ancestral-struggles-climate-diseases

    I suspect that figure is a bit misleading - yes, I can well believe that 61% of the worlds humans have some lactose intolerance.

    But that would be because most asian people are lactose intolerant (as adults) and asian people make up the largest racial group in the world.

    A much lower percentage of caucasian people are lactose intolerant - of course there are some, and it occurs to various degrees and increases in the older population - ie people who were not previously lactose intolerant can develop a degree of it when older.

    If OP is getting symptoms of bloating, bowel issues, nausea etc - then, yes, worth a try of eliminating dairy for a few weeks and see if this helps - even if not previously intolerant.

    But no need for everyone who is tolerating dairy fine, to quit consuming it - either for weight loss or any other biological reason (non-physical ethical choice reasons aside)

    Oh, you are right. I was thinking that Asians count. Gosh, wonder where my half Asian son falls.

    She didn't say that Asians don't count (as you well know), but that it is extremely misleading to assert that "most" people are lactose intolerant based on 61% of the world's population being so, when something like 95% of people from northern and western Europe are not, and as a result a very large percentage of the US population is not.

    Even Asians vary quite a bit, there's a big distinction based on where in India one is from, for example.

    People very often know where they (or their ancestors) are from, know if lactose intolerance is common in their family or not, and know what experiences they have had with it. My ancestors are all from places (northern and western Europe) where lactose tolerance is extremely common and people have been consuming dairy for a long time. People from cultures where it's common ALSO tend to be from cultures where it's less of a regular part of the diet. So suggesting that it's just random, or "most" people are intolerant IS misleading. Saying that in some countries most are, or most with ancestry from certain regions are, not IMO misleading. It's the reverse of what I said upthread, that most with ancestors from areas where dairy consumption has long been common, like northern and western Europe, are not lactose intolerant but have specific mutations that were beneficial in the areas/cultures in which they lived.
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 8,002 Member
    Umm ''that asians count' ???? not sure why the need for sarcasm :*

    I meant the figure is misleading in terms of relevance for most posters - it doesnt mean random poster or OP for that matter has a 61% chance of being lactose intolerant.
    that the statement needs to be seen in context of world population, not individual risk.

    I imagine a person who has one asian parent would be more likely to be lactose intolerant - but I don't know exactly how the genetics of this one work, depends if dominant or recessive type gene, not an area i know enough about.

    Is it only Americans here? I still think alot of people are mixed and might be experiencing some degree of lactose intolerance without even really knowing what’s going on. My son loves ice cream, and eats it eventho it makes him barf occasionally. :/ that’s teenaged boys for you.

    Of course it isnt only Americans here - I am in Australia myself

    But it is probably fair to say that the majority of posters are in western countries; the majority are not in asian countries or of asian ancestory.

    So, the 61% figure, which may well be accurate on a world population level, is highly unlikely to be accurate in terms of poster's individual risk.

  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 8,002 Member
    The main reason, I think, for the evolutionary advantage was the cold weather climate - pre refridgeration, when most human evolution took place since refrideration is new in historical terms, milk could not be kept in hot climates. Most people don't drink milk directly from the animal so if it can't be stored it is useless as a food.

    Not because there wouldn't be access to the source - goats live in hot dry climates and some cattle live in India, for example and not because there were so many alternative foods as there are obviously parts of the world outside Europe where that is not so.