Milk not best for strong bones, report finds

replied:

And how about thousands of others reporting similar results in giving up dairy?......especially those who take their children off the crap and see runny noses, colds, and flu disappear. COMMON SENSE should be enough to tell anyone that fluid from diseased animals shouldn't be a staple food.

Case histories are not great evidence, even when rigorously collected and documented. When reported naked as here, they are no evidence at all.

Diseased? The health of dairy cows is carefully monitored. Considering that their diet is scientifically formulated, and that they are well cared for, they are probably healthier than you.

--Rich "Common sense is the least common of commodities." - Mark Twain

>

ROFLMFAO!!! healthy? The animals have been brest feeding machines for years. You call that healthy?

If it is so healthy why has it been necessary to

separate the cream from the drink? homogenize it? pasteurize it? skim it? filter it? fortify it? preserve it? add sugar to it? flavour it? culture it? sterilize it? Remove all mention of "healthy" in relation to advertising it? Remove all mention of "good for you" in relation to advertising it? Remove all mention of "does a body good" in relation to advertising it? Stop all text advertising of it?

LOL!! Damage control goon "Dr." Harris reporting for duty to help keep the dairy industry alive I see.

The very first dairy industry sponsored study was to determine the benefits of milk calcium on preventing bone loss. It was a given at the time that milk was good for bones. Alas! The two year study found that women supplemented with extra milk were in negative calcium balance. Not only were they NOT building strong bone they were actually LOSING bone mass.

Since then the dairy industry has funded one biased manipulated study after another to keep their product on the market and out of the civil suits.

One of these days Harris. You will be testifying in court concerning the FRAUD you helped perpetuate.

Can cow's milk ads really say that is "healthy" or is "good for you" or "does a body good" when in fact drinking milk can cause ear infections; strep throats; type 1 diabetes; asthma / lung congestion in many persons?

They have tried it all in Canada but within a week of each advert they have to remove it.

Our billboards are filled with milk adverts that have no words now. Just milk filling up body muscles etc.... This will probably be removed shortly also.

They have done well with the white mucous making everybody think that white means calcium and that calcium is needed extra in our diets. Calcium does

***NOT*** make strong bones anyway. Flouride and magnesium makes them strong. Ever see a piece of chalk flex? Milk is very unbalanced mineral wise and not good for long term health, even if the calcium was assimilable.

wrote:

Flu? Flu comes around once a year.

Milk isn't fluid from a diseased animal (at least, not usually) so your claim is vacuous.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "I don't need someone to tell me that George W. Bush is a deceitful, corrupt, clever and destructive man--that's pretty clear on the face of it." -- Garrison Keillor

What's so unhealthy about it? I donated blood for years, but that didn't make me unhealthy.

Neither of those things is "necessary," but people like it that way. I assume you eat all your food raw.

Any food can transmit disease. This is a way to avoid that.

Lower fat. You got a problem with that?

Not to ordinary milk. Not allowed.

How nutty are you? What's wrong with either of those things?

Any food will spoil (except honey).

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "I don't need someone to tell me that George W. Bush is a deceitful, corrupt, clever and destructive man--that's pretty clear on the face of it." -- Garrison Keillor