Danger of Raw Food Products Made from Raw Milk (Yogurt, Cheese, and Butter)

[zeno]

According to in this post provided by TylerDurden, man has yet to become adapted to the consumption of milk. What about cheese, yogurt, butter, sour cream and clarified butter?

Isn't  it correct that when lentils and grains sprout, the carbohydrates change into sugars? What about using raw milk and altering it to through souring or adding culture it? Does the milk become safe, or just relatively safer?

[goodsamaritan]

It will depend on the person.

I myself am lactose intolerant.

And congratulations to those who can digest dairy.

[Haai]

It will depend on the person.

I myself am lactose intolerant.

And congratulations to those who can digest dairy.

Have you tried to colonize your gut with bacteria that can digest lactose? I used to be lactose intolerant until I took a load of probiotics and then began drinking kefir. Now I can drink fresh raw milk without a problem.

[HIT_it_RAW]

Have you tried to colonize your gut with bacteria that can digest lactose? I used to be lactose intolerant until I took a load of probiotics and then began drinking kefir. Now I can drink fresh raw milk without a problem.

and let the lactose be pre-digested by them like in kefir.

[TylerDurden]

Fermentation or eating raw butter instead of raw milk etc. have all been tried to get round allergies to raw dairy. Usually, they don't work, but they seem to work for some. I am leery of these as a solution as I think that, even if all the overt symptoms are seemingly removed, that some underlying causes(inflammation in the gut etc.) can remain which are not so overt, but which could slow down or stop healing/recovery in general of other conditions.

[raw-al]

It all depends on the person/immune system. You will know if you try.

[Löwenherz]

According to in this post provided by TylerDurden, man has yet to become adapted to the consumption of milk. What about cheese, yogurt, butter, sour cream and clarified butter?

Isn't  it correct that when lentils and grains sprout, the carbohydrates change into sugars? What about using raw milk and altering it to through souring or adding culture it? Does the milk become safe, or just relatively safer?

For me raw dairy was disastrous in every form and even more harmful than cooked dairy.

Löwenherz

[zeno]

Wow. I had no idea dairy caused all these problems! And to think of the amount of pasteurized milk that is consumed by my family alone and extrapolating that is unfathomable to think of all the people completely unaware.

[raw-al]

Wow. I had no idea dairy caused all these problems! And to think of the amount of pasteurized milk that is consumed by my family alone and extrapolating that is unfathomable to think of all the people completely unaware.

Dairy can cause problems, just like every food can cause problems.

Tyler is a bit of a militant anti-dairyist. He puts these rants on this site regularly.

Those problems he talks about are his problems and those of a group he speaks with. As to how many and what are actual factual is like a lot of stuff that gets said on this site... speculation.

I had issues with pasteurized dairy, but none since going raw. I am not addicted  I eat meat with no problems.

I was a vege for 23 years and so in the beginning the taste and smell of meat were not pleasant, but that gradually changed.

Basically if you have issues with milk it is related to the difficulty in digesting it as it can be difficult for some.

I know he will start a big fight  defending his wild-eyed statements, as he always does, but I am putting this here to make sure you know a bit of background. He is on a mission from God.

[raw-al]

Here is Wackipedia's actual numbers re Lactose intolerance. Personally I believe these #'s are high because of the fact that pasteurization makes milk harder to digest, so in countries where pasteurization is the law the #'s are overblown.

"Lactose intolerance is the inability to metabolize lactose, because of a lack of the required enzyme lactase in the digestive system. It is estimated that 75% of adults worldwide show some decrease in lactase activity during adulthood.[1] The frequency of decreased lactase activity ranges from as little as 5% in northern Europe, up to 71% for Sicily, to more than 90% in some African and Asian countries.[2] "

[TylerDurden]

I am always amused at how the raw-dairy-drinking minority are so fanatical in their devotion to  raw dairy, like being in a sort of drug-related cult! Yet, such are hypocritical enough to accuse us anti-raw-dairy drinkers of being similiarly religious-minded. You don't ever see quite the same level of fanaticism re raw meats or other raw food, which rather supports the plentiful other evidence re raw dairy and its addictive qualities re opioid content/hormones.

Raw-al, of course, is, as usual, lying re raw-dairy matters. He likes to pretend that lactose-intolerance is the "only" issue with raw dairy, and that everyone is somehow magically "cured" of lactose-intolerance as soon as one drinks the stuff in raw form. This sort of nonsense has been peddled for decades in the RVAF diet community by fools like Aajonus.

Ultimately, you will no doubt feel the need to do elimination diets, including or excluding raw dairy, to see what works for you. Over the years, I have come across numerous people who, at first,  PMed me to say they actually did fine with raw dairy, only for them to admit, after years of experimentation with the stuff, that they actually didn't do so well with it after all.

[raw-al]

Ring a ling,
Ring a ling
It's ranting time in the city.

[TylerDurden]

Ring a ling,
Ring a ling
It's ranting time in the city.

  You can't win any logical, scientific argument in this regard, so you are forced to resort to childishness and the like. If you had any sense, you would just stick to a more standard, more neutral argument, that  "some" people do badly on raw dairy, "some" do fine, and that one should try it and see. Yet your kind like to claim  that raw dairy is like some kind of "holy water" or some such rubbish, without which you are not "blessed" on the path to righteousness, and all that crap. Like I said, it's telling that there is a fanatical pro-raw dairy movement, but none such for promoting raw meats.

[eveheart]

...stick to a more standard, more neutral argument, that  "some" people do badly on raw dairy, "some" do fine, and that one should try it and see. Yet your kind like to claim  that raw dairy is like some kind of "holy water" or some such rubbish...

Thanks, Tyler, for stating this so emphatically. I have been overwhelmed by dairy-fanaticism, which started with my own mother insisting that I drink a quart of milk a day so I could develop normally. After high school, when I was free to eliminate milk, I found that all my childhood maladies disappeared - eczema, diarrhea, flatulence.

My next milk problems occurred some years later during pregnancy. I had access to legal raw milk, which I drank for the calcium, and again my intolerances surfaced.

Swayed by the lactose-intolerance hype in those days, I switched to cultured milk products, but I never processed dairy well, period.

My last experience was trying raw dairy last weekend, on Aajonus' say-so. As soon as I went back to dairy, I had pounding headaches and sleepless nights for two nights in a row. Aajonus, God bless him, has done me much good with his writings, but the raw dairy part just isn't me, and I am grateful to TD for coming right out and saying that this might be the case. Losing one's health leads to desperate measures, and it's hard to sort through all the gurus and figure out where one's inner wisdom is leading. Sometimes we need a firm word from someone who has been there-done that to remind one to step back and put one's own knowledge in the equation.

[TylerDurden]

Yeah, I know, I had a state-employed doctor/uncle who told my mother, for years, pre-rawpalaeodiet,  that  (pasteurised) dairy was the solution for all ills for any child, re supposed strong bones etc.. As a result, I suffered appalling, awful, health-problems, over the decades, which could have been  easily avoided. Makes me want to vomit/weep, given my past experiences.  And my raw-dairy-experiences were not much better.

[Iguana]

It will depend on the person.
I myself am lactose intolerant.
And congratulations to those who can digest dairy.

They could well be the most likely ones to get into serious health troubles latter, decades latter.

Extract from GCB's Anopsology, Part 2

_Let’s go back to the subject of wine. What do you do at a function if somebody proffers you a glass of wine or champagne? Surely, you don’t ask for a glass of milk instead?

o With all due respect to the spirit of Mendès France, I’d choose wine a thousand times over! It’s much closer to something natural. A simple toxic substance like alcohol seems less dangerous to me, in small doses, than the mysterious molecules of an animal’s milk that has nothing to do with my genealogical background.

_And yet, milk is natural!

o Wrong: Cow’s milk is natural for calves, not for man!

_How is it, then, that you’re not against eggs? Eggs are laid to turn into chicks.

o Intelligence isn’t necessary to find eggs in nature. All sorts of animals include eggs in their diet, i.e. field mice, squirrels, monkeys, etc. Our genetic code has had millions of years to adapt to them; whereas, to get milk, one has had to devise no end of contrivances. Nobody has ever seen a gorilla milk a buffalo in a primeval forest.

_It has been said, however, that some snakes will drink from a cow’s udder.

o There, I smell some “snaky” reasoning. And whether the story is fiction or fact, the fact remains that we aren’t reptiles. We have to know what foods human genetics are adapted for.

_Also, Roman mythology has it that Romulus and Remus were suckled by a she-wolf.

o That’s just it, Romulus later killed his brother; that doesn’t say much for such methods. They did, at least, manage to survive on milk, which isn’t necessarily good for one’s health or for one’s mind. In Vietnam, for instance, it is thought that cow’s milk makes children nasty. As for the she-wolf who suckled the twin brothers, there is a slight problem of translation. In Latin, “lupa” means either she-wolf or prostitute. The second possibility seems more likely to me_especially in that, in those days, prostitutes weren’t necessarily looked down on.

_One certainly can’t snag you on anything....

o It’s more relevant to wonder where all those beliefs come from. Whenever food is involved, reason seems to go right out of the window. The guilt arising from cheating with nature means that one hangs onto any system that justifies trickery.
In light of experiments I have carried out, it seems to me that milk and dairy products have a major effect on the development of untold illness: infections, cancers, auto-immune diseases, etc.

_What do doctors who listen to you say to that?

o Of course, they find it shocking. Milk is the same color as innocence. We erect it into a symbol of motherly love. Even the Bible has its finger in the pie, with the land of Canaan_the land of milk and honey. We forget that we are the first mammals who have ever put milk from another animal down our digestive tract.

_So, you feel there’s an unbridgeable gap between mother’s milk and cow’s milk, do you?

o Almost as much of a chasm as between a cow and a woman. The proteins synthesized by different animal species are lined up on specific models that are as different on a molecular scale as physical traits are on an ordinary scale.

_Aren’t proteins hacked up during digestion? They should all be the same once they have filtered through the gut.

o That’s true for the bulk of protein, and that’s why one can sustain oneself on milk. But that’s not the case for all proteins. Unfortunately, it only takes a minute amount of abnormal proteins to damage our health.

_Are you saying that a definite percentage of protein in cow’s milk cannot be properly broken down?

o It’s only a very small percentage , no doubt, but enough to wreak havoc. A lot of babies can’t digest cow’s milk, which proves that some molecules in cow’s milk enter their bloodstream without being broken down otherwise, those molecules wouldn’t cause such reactions.

_It has been asserted, though, that the lining of the bowel protects us from nefarious substances.

o If that was true for all nefarious substances, poison would be unheard of; no substance could have potential to do us harm. It’s obvious that one can’t expect to be fully protected, especially when alien molecules are involved. Further, the bowel lining can be damaged by, say, drink.

_Do you think that allergies to milk have a lot to do with the imbalanced feed cows are fed?

o Naturally, silage, expellers, bio-stimulating hormones and antibiotics are unmistakably harmful. That is why I ran a string of experiments with unblended, organic milk we collected from a wholly trustworthy farmer’s animals. In the end, we even bought two goats. My wife learned how to milk them, and so we had milk warm from the udder, hand-milked and unadulterated.
When drinking the goat’s milk, I seemed to detect slightly sharper changes in taste than with cow’s milk: The former took on an unsavoury taste under particular circumstances, and as I still was quite taken by the idea of vegetarianism, I decreed that it could be deemed a semi-initial food. Unfortunately, we soon had to face facts, and very hard ones too. Members of the family alternated monthly periods of milk drinking to avoid confusing possible causes of ailment. Every single time, the milk drinkers were plagued with faintness, wanness, sunken eyes, the runs, bad breath, coated tongues, greasy hair, moodiness, and, more than anything else, minor cuts invariably turned septic.

_Haven’t you experimented with yogurt or cottage cheese? They are said to be far more digestible than milk.

o If animal milk is unsuitable for our genetic background, it might be hazardous to make it more digestible even should that be of some advantage to our digestion. It is best to keep alien proteins out.

_And yet, the processing of cheese is natural. The rennet used in cheese-making is extracted from the abomasa of cows. Those are natural enzymes that give rise to digestion.

o Possibly, but that amounts to getting around protection devices the body could mount against unconformable nutrients. Consequently, since the stuff is partly digested, digestion isn’t thrown off. And that being so, people are mistakenly happy and fail to see that their bodily defenses may have been put to sleep. This will, of course, not spare them more serious damage to the body further into the breakdown process.

_Apparently, you really believe that milk is laden with toxic substances. It is, however, used as an antidote, which is contradictory.

o Awfully sorry to have to tell you that milk can be harmful in the event of poisoning since it enhances the uptake of fat-soluble toxic molecules. What is more, you have fallen a victim to faulty reasoning: An antidote is not necessary non-toxic.

_What you’re saying is that we’ve been led astray. But it is a scientific fact that milk is very high in calcium. Children need calcium for growth.

o There is three times as much calcium in cow’s milk as in human milk. Should that not give cause for concern?

_Surely, you don’t mean that?

o I do. Milk-drinking also gluts the body with phosphate, which prevents enteric absorption of calcium_which may, contradictorily, bring down blood calcium, a well-documented fact. It’s hardly surprising that children whose thirst is slaked with feeding bottles should suffer from rickets.
Such a calcium overload is, however, just what a calf needs_since it has to build up a huge amount of bone in record time. It’ll have to have sturdy legs to kick predators away in its flight with the herd. Human babies, though, are on a different trip. There is no hurry skeleton-wise. The prime concern is brain development. It just so happens that there is twice as much lactose in human milk as in cow’s milk. Lactose is what it takes to produce the myelin sheaths that encase nerve fibers in the process of growth.
It’s quite simple, really. A human offspring needs to produce a lot of brain substance and a modest amount of bone, whereas a calf has to produce a lot of bone and not so much brain. Therefore, what happens if you feed a human baby with cow’s milk? The Japanese have shot up ever since American dairy was first imported. I have been advised of cases of children whose diets were based too much on cow’s milk and who were experiencing severe mental backwardness.

[PaleoPhil]

Ring a ling,
Ring a ling
It's ranting time in the city.

LOL, good show Raw Al. You got Tyler to do one of his hilarious over-the-top rants.

I am always amused at how the raw-dairy-drinking minority are so fanatical in their devotion to  raw dairy, like being in a sort of drug-related cult! Yet, such are hypocritical enough to accuse us anti-raw-dairy drinkers of being similiarly religious-minded. You don't ever see quite the same level of fanaticism re raw meats or other raw food, which rather supports the plentiful other evidence re raw dairy and its addictive qualities re opioid content/hormones. ....

Raw dairy, raw fruits, cooked fatty meats, and raw honey seem to have the most fanatical followings. With dairy and honey there's Aajonus' devotees and the WAPF and some of our RPDers, with fruits there's the 80-10-10 crowd, especially the 30BAD fruit loops, and many of the Instinctos and our own RPDers, and with savory heated fatty meats like pemmican, bacon and cooked ribeye steaks there are William and the ZIOHers. I think that palatability is likely a major factor, as I've mentioned before. Stephan Guyenet has recently been doing an interesting somewhat related series on food reward (http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/04/food-reward-dominant-factor-in-obesity.html). There aren't many who take great umbrage when someone makes a negative post about broccoli, asparagus or beans, but do one about raw dairy, fruits, honey or cooked fatty meats when their devotees are around and watch the sparks fly. For that matter, you can also get a rise out of people who are devoted to baked goods. Criticizing apple pie can be like criticizing motherhood and motherland to them.

Of course, I don't mean that anyone who likes these foods is fanatical, rather, I just mean that the tastiest foods tend to inspire the most fanatical defenses. Many people seem to take it personally, as though by criticizing raw dairy you were somehow criticizing them. I've seen a certain amount of it in every dietary forum I've perused, and most of the blogs as well.

[TylerDurden]

This is b*llshi*t of course, as there are  FAR more complainers re re raw dairy than raw or cooked fats or raw honey.

[raw-al]

Iguana,

That explanation of why milk is so bad reminds me of the silliness that vegans use to justify not eating meat and every other diet uses to justify their prejudice.

[TylerDurden]

Iguana,

That explanation of why milk is so bad reminds me of the silliness that vegans use to justify not eating meat and every other diet uses to justify their prejudice.

You really hate  the fact that GCB provides numerous, solid, additional reasons as to why raw dairy is bad for one. Petty, petty...

[PaleoPhil]

This is b*llshi*t of course, as there are  FAR more complainers re re raw dairy than raw or cooked fats or raw honey.

LOL, and I suppose it's just coincidence that you disagree with them and attack them, whereas you're all sweetness and sugar with fruit lovers? I doubt there's much "complaining" by dairy eaters at Primal or WAPF gatherings. And it seems to me I remember some rows over pemmican that you were involved in that only ended when William was banned. Besides, I didn't say there was more complaining by fruit and pemmican fans here, just that I've seen across the Internet more strident defense of raw dairy, raw fruit, cooked fatty meats, and raw honey than of other foods.

Where are the bean defenders at? Where are their emotional defenses of beans? LOL Point me to them. Where are the asparagus crusaders waggling their sticks of veg at the nonbelievers? There may be an occasional post here and there where someone admits to eating beans or asparagus, but none of the knock-down, drag-out fights one finds over raw dairy, raw fruit, pemmican and raw honey, and I'm talking about at other forums too. I'm not limiting the discussion to just this one.

Your remarks are the usual substanceless rantings you tend to initially spew out when someone says something that doesn't 100% match your views. To your credit you eventually sometimes provide some evidence and I understand that you had a very bad experience with raw dairy and with Aajonus' bogus advice regarding it, but your rantings are laughable and only undercut your credibility, just as Aajonus' over-the-top praise of raw dairy as a miracle cure does. Mind you, it is good entertainment in occasional small doses. I think I'll call the game "tweaking the Durden" and raw Al is an able player.

[KD]

The idea that something didn't exist at some point in history so is therefore unfit for use in either nutrition or as a health tool is a pretty big mistep any human has ever conceived in the science of human health (and as phil points out that logic does get used to prove all other kinds of diets and avoid things that might be necessary on an individual level) possibly second to Pasteur's conclusions. Ironically people can potentially do worse following such ideas than people that follow standard sterilizations, cooking, and treatments and this is more proof or 'science' to me than any micro assessment or genealogical breakdown of what is 'food'. People seeking alternative health methods IMO need to think more critically than that. In regards to dairy it comes down to genuine critical assessment of any negative symptoms and results..and this applies to both pro or con camps.

To state that the varieties of dairy products do not matter or have the same problems is basically a false statement even if 99.99% people did poorly on a variety of types. Its just not accurate scientifically to say such things are the same because they come from the same source. This is like saying all permutations of oxygen are healthy...or I guess more accurately that liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen which are both harmful cannot be used on a spacecraft to create necessary oxygen. I think if people started thinking more that we are in some artificial condition (like the spacecraft) in need of balancing and manipulating rather than getting to some ideal state merely by mimicking some kind of process or 'diet' that at the end of the day absolutely no one can prove. [FWIW I think dairy fat mimics animal fat pretty well -while milk is potentially dubious for many people - and that dairy fat has bonuses over the available fats that can usually only be obtained frozen]

Generally people latch on to some extreme where since almost all the tools of mankind do not seem to work in terms of creating health, they assume that removing all those things of man will ensure good health alone. Thinking such is like storing garbage bags your entire life in your house and thinking since you stop taking in garbage that these will necessarily just disintegrate or something... not understanding that some kind of physical work, ingenuity and tools or vehicles will be needed for such a process. In a nutshell I think what the issue comes down to is whether throwing dairy on that mess would ultimately be seen as just creating more crap or in some peoples opinions actually aiding in its removal, or simply just providing the energy for doing so that other foods do not seem to for whatever reasons that are individual.

An ancient person may have 0 use for dairy and yet for a modern person and in the many uses of dairy products there is no single replacement for those foods. Meat fats or plant carbs are completely different and do not act on the body in the same way. Even say they are worse, they are just not the same and anyone who uses these things interchangeably can actually say how they work differently. Saying ""people can do fine for many years with dairy" is like saying "people can do fine with many years without it" because basically on some level none of this is necessary but certain things like including dairy or restricting it might be of value for different conditions.

For every study or scientific reasoning for how dairy leeches this or causes that imbalance there is evidence that dairy products SPECIFICALLY can create conditions for toxic compounds to leave the body or for general function/proper bowel health etc..Whether people choose to believe such information I guess is up to them.

The simple empirical fact remains is that if a single person can reverse problems on raw dairy when they could not on other programs ultimately proves dairy as a potentially healthful substance free of universal panning. So even amongst the most critical/skeptical it bodes poorly to cite such information that goes against real world information based on stuff on paper that no one completely agrees upon. It doesn't prove that it isn't potentially bad or that people don't have legitimate personal experiences..but even 99.999999% of the population potentially doing poorly on dairy or if cow dairy was some newly invented laboratory product 50 years ago (as opposed to however many thousands of years) would not be sufficient in disproving peoples actual results.

[Techydude]

Does this mean babies are not supposed to be raw human breastmilk fed?

[raw-al]

... my own mother insisting that I drink a quart of milk a day so I could develop normally. After high school, when I was free to eliminate milk, I found that all my childhood maladies disappeared - eczema, diarrhea, flatulence.

evehart,
I hear ya. Parents (like me no doubt  ) the world over had tried to get their children to eat and do all kinds of wild and wonderful things, especially eat foods that are "Good" for you. They do the wrong things for the right reason. They love their child and want them to have the best start in life.

Unfortunately a number of dietary concepts get foisted on children. My mother frinstance had a thing about powdered skim milk. It was partly economic, but I was disgusted with it. I swear I would starve rather than drink that, but I don't really want to test that theory, thank you. LOL

My ex used conning the kids with sugar and salt in the food and fed them a very SAD regimen. She did this because this was how she was raised. In fact I broke her of the habit she had. Her mother fed her hamburgers and potatoes every single day of her life. Both her mother and her have serious weight issues along with health issues. Mother made it to 69 years before she passed away.

I am very suspicious when mothers talk about food with words like "treats". This normally means sugar OD.

I was a vege for many years and I tried to get them to eat that way but gave up very early in that one. 

One of my daughter's friend was force fed milk even though she didn't like it. That girl grew very tall. Almost a bit too tall. But her mother was tall.

[TylerDurden]

LOL, and I suppose it's just coincidence that you disagree with them and attack them, whereas you're all sweetness and sugar with fruit lovers? I doubt there's much "complaining" by dairy eaters at Primal or WAPF gatherings. And it seems to me I remember some rows over pemmican that you were involved in that only ended when William was banned. Besides, I didn't say there was more complaining by fruit and pemmican fans here, just that I've seen across the Internet more strident defense of raw dairy, raw fruit, cooked fatty meats, and raw honey than of other foods.
 

The only reason I got at William was because he had become far too fanatical on the subject of so-called  "evil carbs" and other utter nonsense re Creationism. He was hardly typical. I mean, there are a few diehards on ZIOH or on some of the fruitarian diet forums, but, outside such forums, there is far less fanaticism than that which exists in the pro-raw-dairy movement as a whole. As a result, I am far less critical of ZC or fruitarians as there is no need for me to moderate their behaviour so much. By contrast, given past examples on other forums, if I didn't target the pro-raw-dairy fanatics when they started preaching, they would, sooner or later, start making it seem as though it was the "their fault" that  people had issues with raw dairy, or worse.

Your remarks are the usual substanceless rantings you tend to initially spew out when someone says something that doesn't 100% match your views. To your credit you eventually sometimes provide some evidence and I understand that you had a very bad experience with raw dairy and with Aajonus' bogus advice regarding it, but your rantings are laughable and only undercut your credibility, just as Aajonus' over-the-top praise of raw dairy as a miracle cure does. Mind you, it is good entertainment in occasional small doses. I think I'll call the game "tweaking the Durden" and raw Al is an able player.

Childish drivel, as usual. You're just getting back at me because I had previously, way back when, criticised your own fanatical "treatises" on Weston-Price among several other issues.

Whatever the case, the very fact that pro-raw-dairy drinkers get worked up by my own stance re raw dairy, is a direct sign of their own fanaticism. I have always stated that I am well aware that some do thrive on raw dairy, so no one can accuse me of suggesting it's always a deadly poison for everyone. Plus, the only reason why I often recommend against raw dairy is that it is so often cited by rawists as causing problems, particularly for those with serious health-problems(unsurprising, really, as rates of allergies and the like often increase in tandem with ill-health).