Susan Carmack wrote:

> First I will list your ?s. Answers are listed below:

I said:

> 1. People are only lactose
> >intolerant have no reason to be concerned with the structure of casein
> >because it does not affect them.

I'm sorry.  I don't see an answer to this or any of my other comments about
milk.  You provided a list of substances.  Casein is not one of them.  How
do you contend that casein affects people who are not allergic to it?  I am
allergic to tomatoes but I don't insist that everyone else should avoid
them, simply because they make me violently ill.

Susan said:
> >2. Just as gluten shows up in our breastmilk, everything the cows are
> >> fed affects us.

I said:
> >>This is simply not true.

I still see no evidence from you as to how these substances affect us.
Proof would consist of epidemiological studies, proving that they cause
illness.  Can you provide that?

I said:
> >3.Putting that aside for a moment, just what are these diseases that cow
> >milk causes "on such a grand scale"?

I am still waiting to learn what all these diseases are.  Again,
peer-reviewed epidemiological studies would serve to bolster your position.


> 4.Even if it were true, most milk sold in the US is pasteurized.  >

Are you saying that most milk in the US is _not_ pasteurized?  Proof
please.

> I got my scientific proof from this list. I will try to answer your
> questions with posts I have saved:
> This is from Robert Cohen author of MILK THE DEADLY POISON:

As a long-time member of this listserv, I hardly consider Robert Cohen to
be a credible source.  Were you here in the spring on 1997, when
communication here ground to a halt because of his abusive and abrasive
style?  Were you here a year ago, when people were threatening a mass
exodus if Robert Cohen remained?

Additionally, the scientific community does not respect internet listservs
as a valid source of "proof" of anything.  I am looking for something from
the scientific literature showing that these substances are detrimental to
humans.  When I say "scientific literature", I am talking about things that
have been published in respected scientific journals after being subjected
to the process of peer-review.

You see, peer review is the corner-stone of modern science.  It means that
other scientists with no interest in the work have looked at it and
evaluated the data and methodologies to see if they make sense.  Without
that process, nothing that is published is worth the paper it is written
on.

Amanda Ackerman