Study says gluten sensitivity is fake

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by strombad

Well, they can still feed their cows hormones or chemicals, it's farm dependant, not milk dependant.

As for the "asthma/allergies" angle, that's actually pseudoscience. All studies looking into the link between the two showed that living on a farm was actually responsible for any of the links between improved allergies/asthma. Not raw milk.

But hey, drink whatever crazy bacteria milk you'd like! I'm going to go ahead and not have tuberculosis with my cereal.

Actually eating any kinds of local foods help with allergies with the local plant life. Absolutely bull#### saying all studies show it doesn't have a link. When I lived on the farm I had tons of allergy's. Raw milk producers dont use hormones or chemicals. To be able to sell raw milk it must be organic. I think you need to actually do some research. I've been making a living from being a cook for 7 years and 4 As a Red Seal Certified Chef. Its My Job to know the exact in and outs. Ever thing you just said is I'll informed and ignorant of what the nutritional facts are. This Is why North America has the worst diets.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Actually eating any kinds of local foods help with allergies with the local plant life. Absolutely bull#### saying all studies show it doesn't have a link. When I lived on the farm I had tons of allergy's. Raw milk producers dont use hormones or chemicals. I think you need to actually do some research. I've been making a living from being a cook for 7 years and 4 As a Red Seal Certified Chef. Its My Job to know the exact in and outs. Ever thing you just said is I'll informed and ignorant of what the nutritional facts are. This Is why North America has the worst diets.

Haha, yeah, I have done some research. Everything you're saying is actually disputing science. I'm just going by what actual studies have shown. If you believe it's beneficial then that's ok for you (you're an adult, drink what you want!), but for the majority of the population in Canada and the USA, it's dangerous and has no proven health benefits. It's a fad, and a dangerous one at that. Here are some quotes with citations:

a reduction of allergies, asthma and eczema; reducing the risk of autism, Crohns Disease and tooth decay; dealing with lactose intolerance; boosting a child’s immune system by providing live bacteria and even reducing the risk of certain cancers.

None of these benefits have been shown to be real in objective, prospective studies, mainly because some researchers would deem it unethical to expose pregnant women and young children to unpasteurized milk, fearing the risks of infections that can lead to food-borne illnesses and in rare cases death.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9816550

While the purported benefits of unpasteurized products may be tempting, keep in mind that none of the claims have been substantiated by scientific evidence.The risk of raw dairy product consumption far outweighs any potential benefits, and even products labeled as "certified" raw milk products are not free from these risks

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/the-raw...w.google.ca%2F

The "farm effect" and a dispute to your "raw milk producers don't use hormones or chemicals" theory:

"This [study] would suggest that if you have early life exposure [to allergens], then somehow it drives the immune system away from developing allergies," he said.
"Large animals are part of it, and the straw bedding animals sleep on," said Holbreich.
...One of the most important observations in the study was the benefit derived from drinking raw, unpasteurized milk.
Surprisingly, the dairy cows themselves are not raised any differently from the mainstream dairy industry, according to Holbreich.
"The Amish are not organic farmers," he said. "These are the same cows and the milk they sell goes to bottling - but something in the processing of milk changes."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/amish-h...w.google.ca%2F

More farm effect!

...growing up on a farm directly affects the regulation of the immune system and causes a reduction in the immunological responses to food proteins.
The research, led by the University of Bristol's School of Veterinary Sciences, found that spending early life in a complex farm environment increased the number of regulatory T-lymphocytes, the cells that damp down the immune system and limit immune responses...
...Regulatory T-cells have been identified in many mammalian species, including humans, and appear to be universal regulators of immune systems and a reduction in their numbers is often associated with the development of allergies, autoimmune and inflammatory diseases.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0208132549.htm

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

People who sell raw milk don't feed the Cows any Hormones or extra chemicals in their feed. Other than If you drink it It helps with allergies and asthma , just like if you eat any other locally produced food.

Why raw vs organic though? I totally understand the chemicals and hormones point of view (although it could simply be raw milk from a regular crap fed cow) but the possible health risk doesn't outweigh the very very minor unconfirmed health benefits to me. I haven't had raw milk in a while so cant comment on the flavour. Raw milk cheese does kick ass though, I wish we had Quebec's laws regarding that.

I might be wrong here but isn't the proposed allergy and asthma benefits unconfirmed? I haven't read into this subject in a while and will just google it after typing this, but it was my understanding before that some scientific review figured that the test wasn't a good one since it was performed only on farm kids who had a built up tolerance to allergies and whatnot anyway. They said it had nothing to do with the milk, or at least was proved that it did.

Not 100% against raw milk it, I just still haven't read anything that proves to me it really is better so I'll stick with what's proven.

Edit: strombad cleared up the allergy part and saved me from having to google it myself. Thanks!

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by strombad

Haha, yeah, I have done some research. Everything you're saying is actually disputing science. I'm just going by what actual studies have shown. If you believe it's beneficial then that's ok for you (you're an adult, drink what you want!), but for the majority of the population in Canada and the USA, it's dangerous and has no proven health benefits. It's a fad, and a dangerous one at that. Here are some quotes with citations:


http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9816550


http://abcnews.go.com/Health/the-raw...w.google.ca%2F

The "farm effect" and a dispute to your "raw milk producers don't use hormones or chemicals" theory:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/amish-h...w.google.ca%2F

More farm effect!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0208132549.htm

What I see are articles written by journalist with out the actual documents of these study's that have been conducted. Just major News outlets that are saying with out actually showing the official documents. It also says you can buy unpasteurized milk at local farmers market. You can't tho . It is illegal to sell it . Anywhere in Canada and In the states. The farmer would lose his License to Farm. Even if Its at a farmers market. And the last article the study was done by Veterinarns. The study was done on piglets at a Veterinarian School. Last time I checked we were talking about humans.

From the Amish article
G. “And what [the Amish children] eat and the fact that their mothers are in the barn when they are pregnant.”

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

What I see are articles written by journalist with out the actual documents of these study's that have been conducted. Just major News outlets that are saying with out actually showing the official documents. It also says you can buy unpasteurized milk at local farmers market. You can't tho . It is illegal to sell it . Anywhere in Canada and In the states. The farmer would lose his License to Farm. Even if Its at a farmers market.

That's all I see when I read articles saying it's good too. Just unproven studies.

Isn't illegal in all US states, just around half of them I think. Lots of regulations though.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by btimbit

That's all I see when I read articles saying it's good too. Just unproven studies.

Isn't illegal in all US states, just around half of them I think. Lots of regulations though.

From the Amish article
G. “And what [the Amish children] [B]eat[/Band the fact that their mothers are in the barn when they are pregnant.”

it says eat and he's trying to say I'm wrong on that . In an article he picked to say it is not a factor for lower allergies. The Amish would be eating local grown foods they grew or their neighbors.


Yesmost likely that's what any ones sees when reading news articles. The colleges/university s do usually publish their findings on their sites or well respected SCIENTIFIC publications that show the complete study findings.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

From the Amish article
G. “And what [the Amish children] [B]eat[/Band the fact that their mothers are in the barn when they are pregnant.”

it says eat and he's trying to say I'm wrong on that . In an article he picked to say it is not a factor for lower allergies. The Amish would be eating local grown foods they grew or their neighbors.


Yesmost likely that's what any ones sees when reading news articles. The colleges/university s do usually publish their findings on their sites or well respected SCIENTIFIC publications that show the complete study findings.

The only scientific publications on the subject I've really seen are ones saying research supporting raw milk is either inconclusive or was a poor study with possible skewed results (like the allergy/farm one) lots of articles and publications saying that benefits are possible but nothing definite, and certainly not ones that outweigh any potential health risks. I'll gladly change my tune if it's proven to be better, but until then I'll stick with Dairyland.

Again mind you I haven't looked into this in years, but as far as I know nothing new has come out saying otherwise.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by btimbit

The only scientific publications on the subject I've really seen are ones saying research supporting raw milk is either inconclusive or was a poor study with possible skewed results (like the allergy/farm one) lots of articles and publications saying that benefits are possible but nothing definite, and certainly not ones that outweigh any potential health risks. I'll gladly change my tune if it's proven to be better, but until then I'll stick with Dairyland.

Again mind you I haven't looked into this in years, but as far as I know nothing new has come out saying otherwise.

I can respect that. I don't exclusively drink raw milk. Mostly Island farms(local dairy factory) . I will drink raw if I can get it. I honestly don't drink much milk. I wasn't trying to saw its purely from the raw milk was be cause of lower allergies. But Eating local foods as a whole. The point kinda got side tracked.


The science daily article on allergies was conducted by Vets on baby pigs.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

I can respect that. I don't exclusively drink raw milk. Mostly Island farms(local dairy factory) . I will drink raw if I can get it. I honestly don't drink much milk. I wasn't trying to saw its purely from the raw milk was be cause of lower allergies. But Eating local foods as a whole. The point kinda got side tracked.


The science daily article on allergies was conducted by Vets on baby pigs.

Fair enough, I certainly have always liked the local foods idea, I don't follow it exclusively by any means but if theres a local all natural option to something I'm taking it.

Wish I could get fresh seafood like you can.

[strombad]

nm

[strombad]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

What I see are articles written by journalist with out the actual documents of these study's that have been conducted. Just major News outlets that are saying with out actually showing the official documents. It also says you can buy unpasteurized milk at local farmers market. You can't tho . It is illegal to sell it . Anywhere in Canada and In the states. The farmer would lose his License to Farm. Even if Its at a farmers market. And the last article the study was done by Veterinarns. The study was done on piglets at a Veterinarian School. Last time I checked we were talking about humans.

From the Amish article
G. “And what [the Amish children] eat and the fact that their mothers are in the barn when they are pregnant.”

The articles are mostly written by doctors actually, not journalists.

Article one: Dr. Peter Neiman
Article two: Nipunie Rajapakse - MD, and Devika Dixit - MD, citing information from Dr. Martin Blasser of NYUSM and the US Center for Disease Control, the AAP, and CDC
Article three: Susan James (the only one who isn't a doctor), citing a study by Dr. Mark Holbreich regarding the "farm effect")
Article four: Researchers from University of Bristol, citing their own study regarding the "farm effect" (as you mentioned the study was done on pigs, mammals, as they give a very similar reading to that of a human without endangering any human beings)

You should look at the credits before you brush them off as journalists. Furthermore, studies and credentials are cited, and you are welcome to investigate the original documents yourself.

How that isn't clear science is a little beyond me, but as I said, you're allowed to believe whatever you want to believe regardless of the science.

Despite your assertions, raw milk is far more dangerous than it is beneficial and it's benefits have never been proven (and generally dismissed as "part" of growing up on a farm, and the benefits that has, but not the sole enabler of those benefits). Most of the studies and article also seemed to assert that any "farm effect" was only valid in the early stages of development. So raw milk when consumed in adulthood, even IF beneficial in helping allergies or your immune system, would have little to no effect unless consumed as a toddler.

Raw milk does nothing for an adult that regular milk doesn't do.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by strombad

The articles are mostly written by doctors actually, not journalists.

Article one: Dr. Peter Neiman
Article two: Nipunie Rajapakse - MD, and Devika Dixit - MD, citing information from Dr. Martin Blasser of NYUSM and the US Center for Disease Control, the AAP, and CDC
Article three: Susan James (the only one who isn't a doctor), citing a study by Dr. Mark Holbreich regarding the "farm effect")
Article four: Researchers from University of Bristol, citing their own study regarding the "farm effect" (as you mentioned the study was done on pigs, mammals, as they give a very similar reading to that of a human without endangering any human beings)

You should look at the credits before you brush them off as journalists. Furthermore, studies and credentials are cited, and you are welcome to investigate the original documents yourself.

How that isn't clear science is a little beyond me, but as I said, you're allowed to believe whatever you want to believe regardless of the science.

Despite your assertions, raw milk is far more dangerous than it is beneficial and it's benefits have never been proven (and generally dismissed as "part" of growing up on a farm, and the benefits that has, but not the sole enabler of those benefits). Most of the studies and article also seemed to assert that any "farm effect" was only valid in the early stages of development. So raw milk when consumed in adulthood, even IF beneficial in helping allergies or your immune system, would have little to no effect unless consumed as a toddler.

Raw milk does nothing for an adult that regular milk doesn't do.

O.K whatever .Credits are just those the journalits talked to. Still just lip service till the actual documents are shown. How the science is not clear to you is their isn't any science really presented. Telling a reporter without the documents don't mean ####. I could claim I was Mr. Universe but unless I have documents to prove it To a reporter then Its lip service. Its just like in school when your Math teacher made to show your work on every answer.

[troutman]

Raw Milk in Modern Times

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/...-modern-times/

5 False Arguments for Raw Milk


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4383

Editors. "Probiotic Without Effect Against Salmonella." Science Daily. ScienceDaily, LLC, 19 Apr. 2010. Web. 6 Oct. 2013. <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100419113654.htm>
Langer, A., Ayers, T., Grass, J., Lynch, M., Angulo, F., Mahon, B. "Nonpasteurized Dairy Products, Disease Outbreaks, and State Laws - United States, 1993–2006." Emerging Infectious Diseases. 21 Feb. 2012, Volume 18, Number 3: 385-391.
Macdonald, L., Brett, J., Kelton, D., Majowicz, S., Snedeker, K., Sargeant, J. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of pasteurization on milk vitamins, and evidence for raw milk consumption and other health-related outcomes." Journal of Food Protection. 1 Nov. 2011, Volume 74, Number 11: 1814-1832.
Paajanen, L., Tuure, T., Poussa, T., Korpela, R. "No difference in symptoms during challenges with homogenized and unhomogenized cow's milk in subjects with subjective hypersensitivity to homogenized milk." Journal of Dairy Research. 1 May 2003, Volume 70, Number 2: 175-179.
Reinagel, M. "Is Homogenized Milk Bad For You?" Quick and Dirty Tips. MacMillan Holdings, 7 Mar. 2012. Web. 6 Oct. 2013. <http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/health-fitness/healthy-eating/homogenized-milk-bad-you>
Wallace, W. "The Udder Truth." Salon. Salon Media Group, Inc., 19 Jan. 2007. Web. 6 Oct. 2013. <http://www.salon.com/2007/01/19/raw_milk/>

[strombad]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

O.K whatever .Credits are just those the journalits talked to. Still just lip service till the actual documents are shown. How the science is not clear to you is their isn't any science really presented. Telling a reporter without the documents don't mean ####. I could claim I was Mr. Universe but unless I have documents to prove it To a reporter then Its lip service. Its just like in school when your Math teacher made to show your work on every answer.

But they are doctors, not journalists, and the documents are right there for you to analyse...

I don't know why you're upset about it. You can decide the risk is worth taking for your own self, nobody is trying to convince you to not drink raw milk, you're an adult.

If you want to drink it, drink it. It's just dangerous and has no proven health benefits. I haven't seen you show any scientific documents showing the health benefits, so until you do, your opinion is no more than that.

I don't drink raw milk, I don't care to, but I also don't care if anybody else drinks it. It is dangerous only as a fad because generally people then do not equip themselves with all of the information. If a fully informed adult wants to drink raw milk, then drink away.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by strombad

But they are doctors, not journalists, and the documents are right there for you to analyse...

I don't know why you're upset about it. You can decide the risk is worth taking for your own self, nobody is trying to convince you to not drink raw milk, you're an adult.

If you want to drink it, drink it. It's just dangerous and has no proven health benefits. I haven't seen you show any scientific documents showing the health benefits, so until you do, your opinion is no more than that.

I don't drink raw milk, I don't care to, but I also don't care if anybody else drinks it. It is dangerous only as a fad because generally people then do not equip themselves with all of the information. If a fully informed adult wants to drink raw milk, then drink away.

I'm not upset at all . Thought we was just talking. If its my colourful language its just how I speak. I honestly thought the same from you. On either side all these articles pro and non pro can be considered as lip service as Btimbit said.

I don't know why the raw milk thing is being so pushed? Origanailly I mentioned it the elluded to it being helping with allergies to tie into me saying All local Foods eaten help with it. Seems your very upset with me drinking It on RARE occasions.

[combustiblefuel]

We are all adults and can eat what we what. Consider this tho. Eating raw eggs is also considered a health risk to. Yet we eat them. Mayo is made from raw eggs and oil . their can be a little lemon juice in their for flavor but not enough yo kill any bacteria. Hollandaise sauce is as well. With hollandaise sauce its raw yokes and clarified butter . the yokes are only heated enough to be warm . Not enough to kill bacteria. Once again vinigar is added but not always . Still not enough of vinigar to kill bacteria. Yes there is pasteurized eggs but I can tell you a lot of the time when you go out to eat they are not using those

[strombad]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

We are all adults and can eat what we what. Consider this tho. Eating raw eggs is also considered a health risk to. Yet we eat them. Mayo is made from raw eggs and oil . their can be a little lemon juice in their for flavor but not enough yo kill any bacteria. Hollandaise sauce is as well. With hollandaise sauce its raw yokes and clarified butter . the yokes are only heated enough to be warm . Not enough to kill bacteria. Once again vinigar is added but not always . Still not enough of vinigar to kill bacteria.

Which is all true, the difference is that nobody is denying those facts or stating that raw eggs have some miracle health benefit over cooked eggs. I mean hey, I said this:

Originally Posted by strombad

Well, it's moderately dangerous and has no scientifically founded benefits over pasteurised milk, so I'm not sure why you'd want if not for some weird diet fad or something on that line.

And you responded with this:

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

People who sell raw milk don't feed the Cows any Hormones or extra chemicals in their feed. Other than If you drink it It helps with allergies and asthma , just like if you eat any other locally produced food.

Neither of which is true, and this:

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Actually eating any kinds of local foods help with allergies with the local plant life. Absolutely bull#### saying all studies show it doesn't have a link. When I lived on the farm I had tons of allergy's. Raw milk producers dont use hormones or chemicals. To be able to sell raw milk it must be organic. I think you need to actually do some research. Ever thing you just said is I'll informed and ignorant of what the nutritional facts are. This Is why North America has the worst diets.

Regarding the bolded, again, none of which is true, as shown by the studies I referenced.

The point is, despite what you were saying, raw milk IS dangerous and has NO proven health benefits at ALL.

As said, you've got every right to drink it if you'd like, but you can't really expect to spread pseudoscience and misinformation and expect it to just go unchecked. Drink the milk if you want, but don't pretend it's better than regular milk and not dangerous.

By all means, if you have studies showing that what you say about raw milk is true, show it. Otherwise, just drink it without spreading dangerous information.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by strombad

Which is all true, the difference is that nobody is denying those facts or stating that raw eggs have some miracle health benefit over cooked eggs. I mean hey, I said this:




And you responded with this:




Neither of which is true, and this:




Regarding the bolded, again, none of which is true, as shown by the studies I referenced.

The point is, despite what you were saying, raw milk IS dangerous and has NO proven health benefits at ALL.

As said, you've got every right to drink it if you'd like, but you can't really expect to spread pseudoscience and misinformation and expect it to just go unchecked. Drink the milk if you want, but don't pretend it's better than regular milk and not dangerous.

By all means, if you have studies showing that what you say about raw milk is true, show it. Otherwise, just drink it without spreading dangerous information.

The last time I'm going to respond to this. Their are a ton of studies up on both good and bad for you. I was never arguing their wasn't. Their are tons of studies proving everything I said . Its not dangerous information. You just have to look at everything with an unbiased view. Posting links to someone who is not open to a new way of thinking is a time killer. I presented my side and their is google for you to look it up. If you go in with a biased opinion of course you'll only see what you want and say its dangerous. Just like people political and religious beliefs make people biased.

[btimbit]

Guys, guys, we're all missing the real issue here. And that's whether or not milk is gluten free

[strombad]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

The last time I'm going to respond to this. Their are a ton of studies up on both good and bad for you. I was never arguing their wasn't. Their are tons of studies proving everything I said . Its not dangerous information. You just have to look at everything with an unbiased view. Posting links to someone who is not open to a new way of thinking is a time killer. I presented my side and their is google for you to look it up. If you go in with a biased opinion of course you'll only see what you want and say its dangerous. Just like people political and religious beliefs make people biased.

Oh, so when I post stuff it's just journalistic BS, but your point of reference for your stance is "Well uh, the Internet?"

I genuinely wanted to see some proof about raw milk being good for you. I haven't found any, that's why I asked you (because I assumed that if you had studies to back up your medical claims). I'm pretty passionate about trying to eat more natural, organic foods that are locally sourced, is say I'm extremely open to raw milk being great for you, I'd certainly try it if what you said was true. I simply haven't found anything suggesting it's true, so I was hoping you had some scientific studies to show me and ease my mind about it's dangers.

There's no bias here, I was genuinely hoping for information. Oh well.