On 7/17/07, N S <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Any idea about what to make of this report?
>
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Have_milk_for_a_longer_life/articlesho=
> w/220
> 9735.cms
>

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Have_milk_for_a_longer_life/articleshow/2209735.cms

You need to be careful about the linebreaks and extra '=' that got
added into that URL.  Hopefully if that one doesn't work for you mine
will, or else carefully repair it...

What to make of it?  It's mildly interesting.  I'd want to see more
science before concluding anything based on one article.  It doesn't
change anything for most people here, IMO.  Most people here don't
drink milk because they can't.  If you're allergic to milk, the fact
that it in general has good health effects on other people is not
really useful information.  The best you can do is find other ways to
eat foods that are healthy for your heart.  If, in the future, some
understanding of the mechanism of the protection arises, then you
might be able to do a more directed approach to replicating it without
the milk.

I am hair-trigger allergic to finned fish too.  All the talk about how
good fish is for you is irrelevant for me.  But now that they know it
is the omega-3's in fish that are important, I can try to get them
from other sources.  (But I'm a little skeptical about the whole
thing, since I haven't had fish in 40 years, and I've only known to
try to replace the omega-3s for a few of them, and I seem no worse for
it...)

So it is with this study about milk.  It may indeed have previously
unknown and still not-understood health benefits.  More information is
needed.  But it isn't going to make people who are allergic or
severely lactose intolerant start drinking it, because those immediate
health issues override whatever potential benefit it has for others.

--Robyn

--Robyn