Hi Irene,

> Alan wrote:
> >An answer that most people funded by the milk industry give, i.e.
> >an answer which provides no contradictory evidence at all. Where
> >is it and who funded it? Is it not factual that most people stop
> >or severely cut back the production of the enzymes rennin and
> >lactase after they wean themselves off of (human) milk? What you
> >have said (that Carl said) does not explain the high levels of
> >osteoporosis in the USA at all. If milk is such a good source of
> >calcium as Carl claims..and you guys drink more of the stuff than
> >anybody else....
>
> Sorry that this is a few days late ... I've been too busy to get to my
> list mail.
>
> One of the problems that exists with the "milk is bad for you no matter
> what" arguments is the fact that many long-lived cultures use milk as a
> primary staple of their diet.  The Hunza, for instance, use soured milks
> and fermented milks, as do many others.  Dr. Price's travels showed no
> purely vegan cultures; all successful ones used animal products.

There are certainly a few pros (and cons) for your argument here. I
have already mentioned why people have problems (either noticeable
or not) with milk per se (whether raw or pasteurized etc.) in other
posts to others so I will not repeat these arguments here. Cheese
for example, produces a lot of whey as a by-product which is
difficult to dispose of. Although it looks and smells like pus it
is usually recycled into all sorts of other industrial foods merely
to get rid of it (at a profit rather than a loss). However, in
the case of all cheeses which I have looked at in the nutrient
tables (including that of the USDA BTW) the interdependent calcium,
phosphorus and magnesium balances are still out of line. The
same goes for yoghurt (in the Germany tables around 120 mg
calcium, 92 mg phosphorus and 12 mg magnesium per 100g yoghurt)
but I "may" see a case for consuming it now and again if it
is live and made from lactobacteria such as acidophilus (to
refill the 5-year vitamin B12 bank and to improve the bowel
flora if need be) and if it is made from raw milk which is
free of pesticides and medications such as antibiotics.

> were NO raw vegan cultures at all.

This is an unproven statement so one should keep an open mind
here. What we certainly do know is that one can both survive
and thrive on a non-meat diet. Did not Walker die at the early
age of 116?

> I feel that the problem with dairy products in this country is not due
> to *milk* per se, but to what's done to the animals.  A source of pure
> organic raw milk and the human ability to use it wisely would be
> conducive to health.  To dismiss milks out of hand (and thereby
> dismissing the cultures who have successfully used it) is not getting a
> complete picture of the facts.
>
Yes and no. Practically all true Africans are allergic to milk, for
example, and we are supposed to have developed from thereabouts. In
addition, I have yet to see a convincing argument in favour of
using milk, i.e. whether wisely or not. Food is not of course the
only recipe for longevity and the Hunzas etc. also enjoyed most
of the other components such as fresh air, exercise, peace and
contentment etc..

Best regards,

Alan