On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Susan Carmack wrote:

> Hi Amanda and list,

I am not sure why this is directed at me but, if I'm going to respond, I
may as well try to fix the attributions a little.

Someone else said:
> >> Yes goat's milk contain lactose but I have yet to find if the sugar
> >> structure in goats milk ( and sheeps milk) are the same as for cow's milk

Then I said:
> >>All naturally occurring lactose is the same.

Then Susan said:
> The lactose may be the same, but the casein is very different especially
> from cows that are fed grains, soy, almost everything except the kitchen
> sink.

I fail to see how this relates to what I said.  We were discussing the
structure of lactose, not protein in milk.  People are only lactose
intolerant have no reason to be concerned with the structure of casein
because it does not affect them.

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

This is simply not true.  Every substance, ingested by a lactating female
(of any species), does not necessarily appear in its original form in the
milk.  Most of what we eat is digested prior to entering the blood stream.
If that were not the case, we would gain little, if any, nutritional value
from the food we consume.

> Goats and wild animals such as yaks usually eat grass and
> nourishment natural to the area. These natural grasses don't cause disease
> in the animals, so they don't cause disease in humans on such a grand scale
> as cows milk.

I don't know how to break this to you but lots of cows eat grass and
"natural nourishment" too.  I grew up in a farming community and the cows
there ate grass in the summer and local hay in the winter.

Putting that aside for a moment, just what are these diseases that cow
milk causes "on such a grand scale"?  Based on my examination of the
scientific literature there are none. There are just some anedotal studies
thrown together by zealots, who are willing to blame everything from
in-grown toe nails to male pattern baldness on consumption of dairy
products.  Another zealot would tell you that these same problems are
caused by articial sweeteners.  Another would blame meat.

Anecdotal "evidence" of this type doesn't wash with me.  I am a scientist.
 I, hold a MS, and am currently a PhD candidate, in chemistry.  If you are
going to make scientific claims, I need to see real, scientific evidence
to back that up.  If you would like to provide citations for your
assertions, preferably from a reputable, peer-reviewed, scientific
journal, I would be happy to read it.

 Since cows are fed hormones and antibiotics on top of their
> unnatural diets, we are adversely affected by these toxic substances too!

If I follow your logic, you are saying that, because some ingested
proteins appear in human milk in their undigested form, hormones and
antibiotics that are given to cows would appear in their milk.  That is
not necessarily the case.  You comparing apples and oranges.

Even if it were true, most milk sold in the US is pasteurized.  This means
that it is subjected to very high temperatures in order to kill bacteria
and other pathogens.  Are you aware that nearly all hormones and many
antibiotics decompose at elevated temperatures, so they would not be
present in their active forms in milk?  Also, the fact that these
substance are bioactive in cattle does not necessarily imply that they
would have comparable activity in humans.

Again, I would be interested in seeing any _legitimate_ scientific proof
you may have to bolster your postion.  In the absence of that, I am afraid
that I must assume that you are another anti-milk zealot, long on
emotion, short of fact.

Amanda Ackerman