The Dangers of (Raw and Pasteurised) Dairy Consumption

[LePatron7]

The fact is that personal experiences are indeed actuate claims

Bwahahah. Actuate claims

[sabertooth]

"actuate claims" although a typo does have actual meaning.

The sentence meaning that the claims based on personal experience are motivational.

[raw-al]

Regular milk consumption is Neolithic. You need domestic animals and pottery to collect significant amounts of milk.

Yeah… milk from zebras, gazelle, elephants, wild boars, tigers or badgers. Tell us when you get some. 

AHA, so I guess that means anyone eating food more than 10 miles from where they live is against the Paleo code also. That includes most fish as it comes from the ocean. These arguments are so old. This thread is old.

[Iguana]

AHA, so I guess that means anyone eating food more than 10 miles from where they live is against the Paleo code also.

Especially as Paleolithic tribes did not live in one place but were nomadic and spread around entire continents… 
I fail to understand your reasoning.

That includes most fish as it comes from the ocean. These arguments are so old. This thread is old.

Yeah, you always come back with the same groundless belief without taking account of the answers repeatedly given.

Fish consumption by mammals, including hominids, has occurred during several millions years and became very common since the invention of harpoons and hooks, 150,000 years ago at least. There not more difference between an ocean fish such a tuna and a coastal fish or even a river fish then between zebra and reindeer meat. It’s the same category of foods (fish), as an apple is of the same category (fruit) as a guava.

On the contrary, milk is a distinctive category of food, meant for youngsters of the specific species. Regular milk consumption of other animal species by humans, including adults is an extremely recent phenomenon, 8000 years for the most ancient cases and is not even generalized yet!

[raw-al]

Especially as Paleolithic tribes did not live in one place but were nomadic and spread around entire continents… 

Nice try Iguana. Tribes did not individually wander around entire continents.

If someone walked all day in a straight line @ 3.1 MPH, in 8 hours they would do 24.8 miles thus 161.3 days to do Vancouver Canada to the coast of Labrador. This would be without dragging food, clothing camping gear, children, cell phones, iPads, in all kinds of weather.

[raw-al]

I fail to understand your reasoning. Yeah, you always come back with the same groundless belief without taking account of the answers repeatedly given.

Ditto

[Iguana]

Nice try Iguana. Tribes did not individually wander around entire continents.

I did not mean individually, of course.

[raw-al]

I did not mean individually, of course.

Exactly my point. Eating a diet that includes foods out side of a very narrow window, which turns out to be probably ten miles would be ridiculous for a tribe. No doubt some wandered further afield and lots such as the Inuit in Labrador did a circuit that took the year to do, but it wasn't that far as they were no more interested in walking endlessly than you would be. These circuits took in foods that would be seasonally apropos such as berries and fruit and possibly small amounts of grain in the summer and meats in the other seasons.

All you have to have is one smart guy in a tribe watch a wild animal (or his female mate with a baby) drink from the breast and he gets the idea. Then he talks about it. Then another guy in the tribe who is good with animals (has that Siddhi) has a wild animal close by and shares in the milk from an animal.

My Tibetan friend lived in Tibet before there was cars. As a child he recalls children out playing and then running over and grabbing the teat of a yak and drinking.

My June 2013 edition of Pro Pilot (page 36) shows a picture of a guy sitting down next to a tiger in a Buddhist Monastery in Thailand. How does that fit into your paradyme? According to the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali circa 100 to 200 BCE this is all quite easy to understand. It says roughly that in the presence of Yog (an enlightened sage) all violence will cease. The tiger will sit down with the horse and the cobra will sit down with the mongoose (These are mortal enemies) In a Buddhist monastery there is a high likelihood of there being en enlightened sage or more. In India these PPL are looked after by townspeople as they see the value in having this pacifying influence on an area. (less crime/violence. So much for the theory that you cannot approach wild animals.

How would you be able to say that no one did this many thousands of years ago? You couldn't, because how would you prove it? Your assumptions are the same ridiculous assumptions that make historians a curious group of PPL who like to sound like they know what they are preaching about so their students will be impressed by their intellectual prowess.

The history of archeology is littered with the silly theories of 'experts'.

[Iguana]

All you have to have is one smart guy in a tribe watch a wild animal (or his female mate with a baby) drink from the breast and he gets the idea. Then he talks about it. Then another guy in the tribe who is good with animals (has that Siddhi) has a wild animal close by and shares in the milk from an animal.

Doesn’t it sound to you like a fairy tale for lacto-vegetarians youngsters? I fail to see how men could one day hunt and kill animals to eat their flesh and another day approach them gently to the point of letting a lactating female drink her milk… Because once an animal species gets hunted in an area, they all start to fear humans and run away from us as fast as they can.   

My Tibetan friend lived in Tibet before there was cars. As a child he recalls children out playing and then running over and grabbing the teat of a yak and drinking.

Most yaks are domestic. Was it wild ones? And are wild ones really savage?

My June 2013 edition of Pro Pilot (page 36) shows a picture of a guy sitting down next to a tiger in a Buddhist Monastery in Thailand. How does that fit into your paradyme? According to the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali circa 100 to 200 BCE this is all quite easy to understand. It says roughly that in the presence of Yog (an enlightened sage) all violence will cease. The tiger will sit down with the horse and the cobra will sit down with the mongoose (These are mortal enemies) In a Buddhist monastery there is a high likelihood of there being en enlightened sage or more. In India these PPL are looked after by townspeople as they see the value in having this pacifying influence on an area. (less crime/violence. So much for the theory that you cannot approach wild animals.

Buddhist monks are not hunters; Buddhism and yoga are recent things, devised by civilized and mainly vegetarians people. Anyway, such stories are at best anecdotal and not representative at all of the common reality. 

How would you be able to say that no one did this many thousands of years ago? You couldn't, because how would you prove it?

First, it would be fine to know if those weird stories have been undoubtedly documented in present times! And what would be the point anyway if it was perhaps done “many thousand years ago” by civilized lacto-vegetarians? Men mastered the fire about 350,000 or 400,000 years ago and possibly some started to grill food soon afterwards. This doesn’t mean grilled food is harmless.

Your assumptions are the same ridiculous assumptions that make historians a curious group of PPL who like to sound like they know what they are preaching about so their students will be impressed by their intellectual prowess.

The history of archeology is littered with the silly theories of 'experts'.

Feel free to challenge the whole current mainstream ideas about history and prehistory and rewrite it in a “non ridiculous”, intelligent way!

Cheers
François

[Iguana]

I fail to understand your reasoning. Yeah, you always come back with the same groundless belief without taking account of the answers repeatedly given.

Ditto

Please note that after following the discussions on this forum, I modified my idea about milk consumption in the Paleolithic era. I thought there was no way to get any single drop of milk form a wild animal, dead or alive, but Miles posted a video where a little bit of milk seeps from a dead deer and PaleoPhil posted some stories which tend to show that a little bit of milk can be occasionally found in dead females. This is alike to the fact that sometimes, although rarely, food grilled or roasted can be found in nature after a forest fire or a volcanic eruption.

I also changed drastically my stance about raw dairy in 1987. Before, I consumed a lot of dairy, preferably raw, but when presented with the evidence and logical inferences, I decided to experiment the instinctotherapy / raw paleo nutrition and suppressed totally all dairy from my diet.     

[raw-al]

Buddhist monks are not hunters; Buddhism and yoga are recent things, devised by civilized and mainly vegetarians people. Anyway, such stories are at best anecdotal and not representative at all of the common reality. 

Sorry to burst your bubble but the Dalai Lama is non a vege and indeed when he became one upon moving to India as a bow to his Indian hosts, he became sick after awhile and was advised by his physicians that he needed meat.

[van]

If you want milk from a wild animal which is lactating, kill it before the baby has awaken and emptied her milk sac.  If you've owned and milked animals, you'll understand this completely. 

[raw-al]

If you want milk from a wild animal which is lactating, kill it before the baby has awaken and emptied her milk sac.  If you've owned and milked animals, you'll understand this completely. 

Actually as I am sure you are well aware VAn the very first milk from an lactating animal called collostreum is incredibly powerful stuff.

I heard a story, no idea if it is really true, but Rockefella (the oil guy) worked himself into a state of bad health at one point in his life, to the point where he was at death's door. At the time, one therapy touted by Doctors, was mother's milk. So he consumed milk expressed or pumped from a wet nurse.

[Iguana]

 

Sorry to burst your bubble but the Dalai Lama is non a vege and indeed when he became one upon moving to India as a bow to his Indian hosts, he became sick after awhile and was advised by his physicians that he needed meat.

Don’t worry, Al, you do not burst anything: I wrote “mainly vegetarians”. I very well know that they are not all strict vegetarians. My ex-wife is Buddhist and she eats meat sometimes.

[sabertooth]

Even Buddha as a young man, wandered with the ascetic wild men, whom legend has it, lived as foragers and ate raw meat.

When my Babys mommy was full of milk, I would occasionally nurse some of the excess. It was very good and I seemed to do well on it, though it wasn't a consistent practice.
 
Sometimes, if I drank a lot I would notice a laxative effect, but it in no way had the other negative effects of Raw animal dairy.

I could imagine that some paleo men at some point in history would take some milk from the tit of his mate.

[raw-al]

ST,

I tried that when my ex was nursing our two. Funnily enough I did not like it at all. She wasn't that healthy herself and her diet was about one hook up from disgusting.

[sabertooth]

Yeah the taste changes with diet.

After she would eat bland more pure foods like rice she would swell with milk and it would be sweet and good. Other times if she was eating a lot more processed junk foods it would taste bad.

If she would drink cows milk or too much wheat, it would cause the babies to get gassy. So she lowered her wheat consumption and switched to coconut milk and after that the milk tasted much better, without the gassy baby side effects.

[raw-al]

Interesting. I know a girl who is actually quite careful of what she eats and she drinks as much milk as she can stand. She doesn't like the taste at all and I tell her not to drink it because she is obviously not doing well on it. She is nursing 2 girls.

She is getting obvious Kapha reactions with colds, runny nose, etc.

I understand why she thinks it is a good idea but.... it ain't.

[Inger]

hehe... I just have to say.. I LOVE you guys! LOL this whole page is full of stuff.. very cool stuff 

[blake]

I can only speak of my own experience drinking plenty of raw milk over the last 15 years. I was severely allergic (lactose intolerant) to pasteurized milk, and so I had stopped consuming milk and all dairy products. But when I had raw milk and other raw dairy it was a completely different kind of animal- digested beautifully. I'm not saying it's for everyone, but listening to this debate I do get the sense there's a little bit of a power struggle or something about whether raw milk is "good" or not. I say were all in this together trying to figure out what works and doesn't work- so I say lets all try to remain open minded and not attached to a particular belief about something. And I include myself on this as well.

But listen, if your going to say things about raw milk not being good, then it seems reasonable to me that you must cite studies on raw milk, not pasteurized. Do we really know the full implications of what pasteurization, homogenization, standardization, antibiotics, hormones, conventional feed, blah blah blah does in regards to the health integrity of milk? I would venture to guess that we do not. I have heard for instance that calcium and other minerals are cauterized when exposed to high temperatures - this could be what's going on with the absorption or utilization problem with the calcium. I am not aware of this idea of needing a balance between magnesium or calcium - maybe theres something to that, i don't know. But what I can say is that I think raw milk and other raw dairy has been instrumental in my healing process. Actually, after I experienced how well raw milk digested I began to consider that maybe raw meat would digest well also. Just my 2 cents

[blake]

hehe... I just have to say.. I LOVE you guys! LOL this whole page is full of stuff.. very cool stuff 

Oh you are such the peace maker

[blake]

Oh you are such the peace maker..

I am appreciating your lightheartedness contribution

[blake]

Ahh, I am still learning how to post on a forum, forgive me

[TylerDurden]

A couple of issues:-  first of all, pasteurisation involves temperatures below boiling so does not involve  really high temperatures, so hormones/calcium etc. would likely be unaffected. On the other hand,  the animal fats  in dairy would very easily be affected  judging from the amounts of heat-created toxins found in even lightly pasteurised dairy.
 Also,  I have come across, on an anecdotal level, a number of raw animal foodists  who have complained of magnesium-deficiency as a result of consuming too much calcium-rich raw dairy, so I do not even need a raw dairy study to confirm this.

Naturally, I wholly accept that some people need only  to consume raw dairy, or, better still,  raw(fresh or fermented)  dairy from grassfed animals,  and thrive on such yet do badly on pasteurised dairy. It is just that  a large number of people exist who cannot handle either raw or pasteurised dairy at all.

[van]

Tyler,  even though I'm not  a proponent of milk anymore,  I will jump forward though and point out that even though pasteurization  May not damage proteins etc... it certainly kills every living bacteria in the milk, including all or most enzymes.   They were created for a purpose, and to forget that is a mistake in looking at a bigger picture of how milk is utilized by humans.