>------------------------------
Hi Amanda,
Thanks for your reasoned and very reasonable response. I will try to
respond in kind.
>> Actually, lactose intolerance may well occur in conjunction with casein
>> intolerance. Further, it is often difficult to get testing for intolerance
>> to this milk protein.
>What is the cause of this?  Do people who are lactose intolerant develop
>problems with the protein due to lack of exposure to it or is there some
>other cause?
My understanding is that the immune mediated damage to the intestinal wall
in protein intolerance causes dramatic reductions in brush border enzymes
..... lactase being one of them.
>I've often wondered if people who avoid dairy products (for
>whatever reason but specifically because of milk allergy) become lactose
>intolerant because they don't _need_ to be able to digest lactose.  Any
>idea?
Although I don't subscribe to that perspective, there is some peer reviewed
work that suggests that possibility. However, I don't remember any specific
sources on that..... it has been a while since I read them.
>I believe it's an IgE response.  I was diagnosed as a small child, so I
>don't know much more than that about the test.  I'm allergic to peppers as
>well.  In any case, I wasn't comparing the type or severity of my reaction
>to anyone else's.  I was attempting to point out that the fact that
>tomatoes are "bad" for me, does not make them "bad" for anyone else.
Sure, I accept that.  The point I was making is that a simple scratch test
can identify most IgE and IgM responses. There isn't the same guessing game
and search for diagnosis involved. Hence, there isn't the same build-up of
frustration  that can lead to more strident language.
>Therefore, the fact that one individual may be allergic to milk, does not
>necessarily imply that milk is "bad" for everyone.
Well, when 2/3 of the world's population has to take lactase to be able to
digest the sugars in milk, and when milk protein is repeatedly identified
in the literature the second most common dietary allergen, and when many of
those afflicted with mental illnesses such as autism and schizophrenia
improve on diets excluding milk (in the absence of selective antibodies) I
think that there is cause to make sweeping generalizations that milk is not
a food to which we humans have adapted. (citations available on request)
>
>Regarding your comment about open-mindedness, I think that applies both
>ways.
I agree. I think I was remiss with some of the comments I made.
>I have not made any sweeping statements with regard to dairy
>consumption by humans.
Actually, that is what drew me into the debate..... your sweeping
statements about Susan's sweeping statements. You made several...., taking
the opposing argument about dairy consumption by humans. You said it was
just not true that everything that cows eat does not show up in their milk.
That is a position that is very difficult to defend.
>I never touch the stuff because it makes me
>violently ill.  However, I would not extend that, as some other people
>seem willing to do, and say that milk _must_ be bad for everyone based on
>my own experiences with it.
Perhaps not, but I'm sure you can appreciate that if my hypothesis is
correct, and the exogenous opioid peptides from the incomplete digests of
gluten and dairy proteins is contributing to the exponential increases of
malignancy during this century, that alone would be sufficient cause to be
very negative about dairy.
>I have read what the anti-milk people have to
>say.  I simply don't agree with it, not due to closed-mindedness, but
>because I think that they are wrong.
Fair enough. I would like to retract the implication that your mind was
closed. I shouldn't have rushed to judgement on that issue. I'm sorry.
best wishes,   Ron Hoggan