# Milk and cow products



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 26, 2013)

Are they really bad for you? Is drinking milk really not a good idea? Same for cheese and other cow products. I've been told I should cut all cow products out of my diet and that milk can slow down or lessen the absorption rate of nutrients I eat. Any thoughts and opinions? I'm a huge fan of dairy products.

In addition I found out I am deficient in vitamin D which makes me wonder how much is in milk anyways because I drink like 32oz of it a day...lol So much for being fortified with D.


----------



## _LG_ (Apr 26, 2013)

Drink and eat raw unpasteurized dairy


----------



## Swfl (Apr 26, 2013)

I used to drink a gallon of whole milk a day. I cut all milk out except for a little bit for my coffee and I've never looked better! I like yogurt and cheese but don't eat too much of it.


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 26, 2013)

Little Guy said:


> Drink and eat raw unpasteurized dairy



Not really something available where I live.


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 26, 2013)

Swfl said:


> I used to drink a gallon of whole milk a day. I cut all milk out except for a little bit for my coffee and I've never looked better! I like yogurt and cheese but don't eat too much of it.



I love milk but I can probably do without it. I'd for sure have to cheat now and then with cheese. Cheese is on the same level as bacon when it comes to something I enjoy eating.


----------



## Dr.G (Apr 26, 2013)

too much of anything is not good for you, your diet must be varied. you really don't need milk at adulthood, it is a matter of taste.


----------



## PushAndPull (Apr 26, 2013)

I don't think you have to stop completely, but it definitely sounds like you should cut back. That's got to be a lot calories in just dairy.


----------



## Kenny Croxdale (Apr 26, 2013)

TrojanMan60563 said:


> Are they really bad for you? Is drinking milk really not a good idea? Same for cheese and other cow products. I've been told I should cut all cow products out of my diet and that milk can slow down or lessen the absorption rate of nutrients I eat. Any thoughts and opinions? I'm a huge fan of dairy products.



Do you believe everything you are told?  

There's a lot of positive effects from milk.  

Read...learn.

Kenny Croxdale


----------



## Kenny Croxdale (Apr 26, 2013)

Dr.G said:


> too much of anything is not good for you, your diet must be varied. you really don't need milk at adulthood, it is a matter of taste.



Milk provides some benefits.  

Kenny Croxdale


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 26, 2013)

I mostly want confirmation that drinking milk and eating dairy prevents nutrients from absorbing inside the intestine. I drink about 16-24oz of skim milk a day. If anything the sugar was the only thing that I felt wasn't worth it until hearing this news.


----------



## heavylifting1 (Apr 27, 2013)

Milk and cheese isn't good for you I would not consume it. The only thing I eat from a cow is beef.


----------



## Kenny Croxdale (Apr 28, 2013)

heavylifting1 said:


> Milk and cheese isn't good for you I would not consume it.



Wow, here what I like.  A vague statement based on nothing to back it up.  

You need to go do your homework. 

Kenny Croxdale


----------



## exphys88 (Apr 28, 2013)

There aren't any nutrients in milk that you can't get from other foods.  

There are mountains of research showing that those that consume less animal products and more unprocessed plant foods including legumes, vegetables, fruits and whole grains are much healthier than those that consume large amounts of animal products and processed foods.

 I'm unaware of milk affecting the absorption of nutrients.


----------



## _LG_ (Apr 28, 2013)

Grains over milk, really?  Lol


----------



## exphys88 (Apr 28, 2013)

Little Guy said:


> Grains over milk, really?  Lol



No, not grains over milk, but the healthiest humans in terms of heart disease, obesity, diabetes and cancer eat diets w very little animal products and eat lots of grains.

They're not the most jacked, but they live the longest and have far less incidence if the disease I mentioned.

Look up "blue zones" and their similarities.


----------



## _LG_ (Apr 28, 2013)

Yeah I've noticed how healthy all the people following the grain based diet are.  Not the most jacked is the least of their problems


----------



## theCaptn' (Apr 28, 2013)

If you want to be jerked, drop the dairy


----------



## exphys88 (Apr 28, 2013)

Little Guy said:


> Yeah I've noticed how healthy all the people following the grain based diet are.  Not the most jacked is the least of their problems



You mean like the Japanese, or seventh day Adventists?


----------



## chocolatemalt (Apr 28, 2013)

TrojanMan60563 said:


> In addition I found out I am deficient in vitamin D which makes me wonder how much is in milk anyways because I drink like 32oz of it a day...lol So much for being fortified with D.



I did some research a while ago (didn't save any links, sorry) and found that studies on vitamin D benefits point to something in the range of 1000-5000 IU/day for best effectiveness.  For people getting no fortification, not eating fatty fish, not spending time in the sun, and those with dark skin in higher latitudes, you should aim for the upper end of that range.  I'm going with 2500.  Pills are small and cheap.

Anyway, for fortified milk it does have the stuff but only at (typically) 100 IU/cup.  So your 32oz is 400 IU/day.  If you drink the whole gallon you'll be in better territory but short of that you might want to just get the pills.


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 28, 2013)

Chocolatemalt thanks for the dose input. I was going to just start with 1000iu and see where that puts me on labs. I am going to supplement calcium too. A friend said if you're low on D you're likely low on calcium too. Gonna start with 1200mg calcium.


----------



## Powermaster (Apr 29, 2013)

TrojanMan60563 said:


> I mostly want confirmation that drinking milk and eating dairy prevents nutrients from absorbing inside the intestine.



I would image so if you are lactose intolerant. You'd probably have issues with absorbing anything.


----------



## heavylifting1 (Apr 29, 2013)

Kenny Croxdale said:


> Wow, here what I like.  A vague statement based on nothing to back it up.
> 
> You need to go do your homework.
> 
> Kenny Croxdale




No sir milk and cheese will bloat you up there is no need to post a study when there is things like google!


----------



## dave 236 (Apr 29, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> You mean like the Japanese, or seventh day Adventists?


Yeah cause the Japanese never eat animal products. What type of plant is fish btw? Or that nasty no good Kobe beef? 


Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## dave 236 (Apr 29, 2013)

heavylifting1 said:


> Milk and cheese isn't good for you I would not consume it. The only thing I eat from a cow is beef.



It isnt good for you. Im fine with my cheese thank you. 

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## exphys88 (Apr 29, 2013)

dave 236 said:


> Yeah cause the Japanese never eat animal products. What type of plant is fish btw? Or that nasty no good Kobe beef?
> 
> 
> Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2



Lol, I'm just making the point that the Japanese, like most of the world eat most of their calories from carbohydrate sources.  If you research the longest living humans, they all eat mostly plant foods and eat 50-70% of their cals from carbohydrate sources.  The areas where these people live are called blue zones.

http://www.bluezones.com/live-longer/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Zone


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (Apr 30, 2013)

Well 10lb tub of egg whites are on their way. I hope this stuff doesn't taste horrible or I'm gonna have to get some cocoa powder or something....might do that anyways lol


----------



## Powermaster (Apr 30, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Lol, I'm just making the point that the Japanese, like most of the world eat most of their calories from carbohydrate sources.  If you research the longest living humans, they all eat mostly plant foods and eat 50-70% of their cals from carbohydrate sources.  The areas where these people live are called blue zones.
> 
> How to Live Longer | Blue Zones
> 
> Blue Zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




This might be because most of the world is poor and can't afford much or any meat products.


----------



## heavylifting1 (Apr 30, 2013)

dave 236 said:


> It isnt good for you. Im fine with my cheese thank you.
> 
> Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2



OH! Don't get me wrong I love cheese.


----------



## benzo (Apr 30, 2013)

Eating grains and dairy is fine unless you have some sort of allergy to them, people who avoid all of them at all costs are misguided. I just ate dairy, a diet soda, and gluten and somehow magically I did not spontaneously combust. Dairy consumption promotes lean body mass, bodyfat loss, and improved bone preservation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23075559 . And if you are deficient in Vitamin D just go out in the sun more and problem solved.


----------



## Gorm (May 1, 2013)

Regular pasteurized milk, especially skim milk, is basically worthless as a source of vitamin D and Calcium. D is a fat-soluble vitamin, and Vitamin D is needed for proper absorption of Calcium. In raw milk all of this is packaged together nicely with enzymes and probiotics. Taking the fat out of milk and the pasteurization process fucks that all up so you're no better off than just taking a multivitamin.


----------



## benzo (May 1, 2013)

Gorm said:


> Regular pasteurized milk, especially skim milk, is basically worthless as a source of vitamin D and Calcium. D is a fat-soluble vitamin, and Vitamin D is needed for proper absorption of Calcium. In raw milk all of this is packaged together nicely with enzymes and probiotics. Taking the fat out of milk and the pasteurization process fucks that all up so you're no better off than just taking a multivitamin.



Where is the data on this? There's a lot of hearsay and wise tales about raw milk out there. Raw milk is very low in vitamin-d and the only time milk is high is when it is fortified during the pasteurization process. Besides safety concerns I'm not going to say pasteurized milk is better than raw because there isn't any reason to claim is but to say that is worthless as a source of calcium, because of its lack of fat is non-sense. Where is the data on that?  In the small intestine vitamin D is packaged into micelles with the help of bile produced by the liver. It is then absorbed into the enterocyte, where it is incorporated into chylomicrons and circulated away from the intestine, first in the lymph and then in the blood. Vitamin D can also be synthesized by the body in the form of cholecalciferol (D3) produced as a metabolite of cholesterol in the skin when it is exposed to UV light, i.e. the sun. Most people can the Vitamin D that they need simply by being out in the sun enough everyday but you can also get it from egg yolks, butter, fatty fish, fish oils, and mushrooms. You simply need to have fat in the digestive tract for the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins so unless you are eating a fat-free diet or have some order disorder affecting fat absorption you should be fine. Whole milk may have better retention of Vitamin D and have a higher content but a study has shown that the mean vitamin-d content didn't really differ. Vitamin D content and variability in fluid milks... [J Dairy Sci. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
Also here was another study showing that vitamin-d fortification was effective way vitamin D levels in children Impact of vitamin D fortified milk supplement... [Osteoporos Int. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI


----------



## Jenie (May 1, 2013)

TrojanMan60563 said:


> Are they really bad for you? Is drinking milk really not a good idea? Same for cheese and other cow products. I've been told I should cut all cow products out of my diet and that milk can slow down or lessen the absorption rate of nutrients I eat. Any thoughts and opinions? I'm a huge fan of dairy products.
> 
> In addition I found out I am deficient in vitamin D which makes me wonder how much is in milk anyways because I drink like 32oz of it a day...lol So much for being fortified with D.



I would rec anywhere from 1000-4000iu ED of vitD (D3).
I wouldn't rely on milk for it.


----------



## Gorm (May 1, 2013)

Uhhh.... read my post and then re read your response. What exactly are you disagreeing with me on? Cause I don't see it. Do we agree that Vitamin D is a fat soluble vitamin? Do we agree that the poster was concerned about getting enough Vitamin D? I said there isn't much difference between store-bought Vitamin D fortified milk and a Vitamin D supplement? And you say there is lots of ways to get Vitamin D besides milk and go on to list other foods with fat that Vitamin D is in. Where is the disagreement?
Do we agree that 'Vitamin fortifited' and a 'Vitamin supplement' (like a multivitamin) are effectively the same in the context of this conversation?

Bodybuilding.com - Milk: Truth & Myths!


----------



## chocolatemalt (May 1, 2013)

benzo said:


> Most people can the Vitamin D that they need simply by being out in the sun enough everyday



Do you think this is a workable solution for all the people living in the northern half of the US above a line running from mid-Nevada through CO, OH, and MD?  That's 4-6 months of winter, requiring lots of clothing even on those rare days (in the Northeast and upper Midwest) when there's even any sun to see.  The only radiation received will be short periods of low-sky, glancing-ray sunshine on the face... insignificant.  Or how about everyone living near the coast in OR and WA (i.e. most of the populations of those states) on up through Vancouver and into Alaska?  Raining a good portion of the time, overcast much of the rest, and too chilly for any real skin exposure half the year anyway even if the sun is out.

I'm guessing at least half the people in the country can't reliably use the sun for vitamin D.  Diet or supps must be the answer there.  Deficiency is a widespread problem.


----------



## exphys88 (May 1, 2013)

Powermaster said:


> This might be because most of the world is poor and can't afford much or any meat products.



The reason is irrelevant, the effect is still the same-longer life, less disease.


----------



## benzo (May 1, 2013)

Gorm said:


> Uhhh.... read my post and then re read your response. What exactly are you disagreeing with me on? Cause I don't see it. Do we agree that Vitamin D is a fat soluble vitamin? Do we agree that the poster was concerned about getting enough Vitamin D? I said there isn't much difference between store-bought Vitamin D fortified milk and a Vitamin D supplement? And you say there is lots of ways to get Vitamin D besides milk and go on to list other foods with fat that Vitamin D is in. Where is the disagreement?
> Do we agree that 'Vitamin fortifited' and a 'Vitamin supplement' (like a multivitamin) are effectively the same in the context of this conversation?
> 
> Bodybuilding.com - Milk: Truth & Myths!



His main question was asking if regular milk is bad for you. You said that pasteurized milk, especially skim milk is worthless as a calcium and vitamin D source. You go on to saw Raw milk is a better choice for him when in fact all milk is extremely low in vitamin-D making fortification the only time milk is actually a decent source of vitamin d. I cited research to show you that the vitamin d content average in milk whether skim or whole is retained about the same no matter what the fat content and also proof that the fortification has been shown to be effective but I never said that pasteurized fortified milk was a bad source I simply said Raw milk which is unfortified is not a great source. You attempted to make the assumption that removing fat from milk makes the vitamin D unable to be absorbed since its a fat-soluble vitamin and therefore the calcium is useless when the actually fat content of the food itself is unrelated to its absorption. Are you going to try and say that pumpkin is useless as a Vitamin A source because it has no fat and vitamin a is a fat soluble vitamin? Yes most of the recommendations for Vitamin D besides Sunlight and mushrooms are higher in fat but you simply need to have lipids and bile present in your GI tract so unless you consume no other fat during the day whatsoever you are going to be fine. Malabsorption/deficiency can be caused by an extremely low-fat diet or lack of sun exposure but may also be the sign of other underlying problems. And unless you have zero vitamin d stored in your body the calcium is not useless simply because the source of calcium had no vitamin d in it. Your body still stores/produces its own Vitamin D and regardless of origin, is an inactive prohormone and must first be metabolized to its hormonal form before it can function. Once vitamin D enters the circulation from the skin or from the lymph, it is cleared by the liver or storage tissues within a few hours. Vitamin D is converted to its active form, Calcitriol and together with PTH it stimulates the renal distal tubule re absorption of calcium, ensuring retention of calcium by the kidney when calcium is needed. Vitamin D as active calcitirol is what is required for calcium absorption not it's inactive dietary form. As for the article you linked his ONLY reference besides "living on a farm" is a study (which he fails to actually give a true reference for) which was done on Cats which he then comes to the conclusion that BAM there's all the proof you need that pasteurized milk is bad for you and raw is the only way it should be consumed. As for OPs deficiency if it cannot be fixed by increased sun exposure and supplementation then he may have another underlying issue affecting his production/absorption. 

If you want to learn a little more about Vitamin D here you go, everything you ever dreamed of: Overview of Vitamin D - Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D - NCBI Bookshelf


----------



## sneedham (May 2, 2013)

I used to drink a lot of milk straight from the cow. My mother would buy it when I was younger it was delicious...I know longer have a source for it now but I would not mind a glass now and then....Just sayin...


----------



## HFO3 (May 2, 2013)

I love milk! especially with cookies, cakes or brownies

If you're not lactose intolerant, it is good to drink milk.


----------



## TrojanMan60563 (May 2, 2013)

chocolatemalt said:


> *Do you think this is a workable solution for all the people living in the northern half of the US *above a line running from mid-Nevada through CO, OH, and MD?  That's 4-6 months of winter, requiring lots of clothing even on those rare days (in the Northeast and upper Midwest) when there's even any sun to see.  The only radiation received will be short periods of low-sky, glancing-ray sunshine on the face... insignificant.  Or how about everyone living near the coast in OR and WA (i.e. most of the populations of those states) on up through Vancouver and into Alaska?  Raining a good portion of the time, overcast much of the rest, and too chilly for any real skin exposure half the year anyway even if the sun is out.
> 
> I'm guessing at least half the people in the country can't reliably use the sun for vitamin D.  Diet or supps must be the answer there.  Deficiency is a widespread problem.




Agreed I live in Chicago and a good friend said a lot of people in the Midwest are low on D during winter months. Its very common because you can't go outside to get your dose of sun when its freezing balls.


----------



## sneedham (May 2, 2013)

I am originally from Minnesota and talk about freezing your balls off ...lol.. you definitely are going to be D deficient. You have to get it through supplements if your end game is to get required amount...B-)

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2


----------



## benzo (May 3, 2013)

I am originally from Chicago as well and I know the lack of sun you can see in that area. I wasn't suggesting that his fix or the fix to Vitamin D deficiency was to simply go outside more. I was just stating the fact there a lot of people do get enough Vitamin D simply from sun exposure. My reference to the sun more in reference to the false comment made that milk is worthless as a source of calcium. People in northern climates/areas with low sun exposure as well as people with very dark skin most likely cannot get enough Vitamin D through sun exposure, especially during the winter which in those cases supplementation can be very important. I never suggested that simply going outside is the one stop fix to the problem, supplementation and diet are very important especially when you cannot get out in the sun much.


----------



## forumhacker (May 10, 2013)

where you going to find raw milk anyway? any milk is good for igf-1 and bulking


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 11, 2013)

Pasteurized casein can cause problems in some people, raw dairy casein appears to be fine.  The amount of casein you can consume without significant gut damage is individual and based on your age and what else you eat.  I wouldn't expect someone who eats some cheese here or there to have a problem, but someone who eats tons of grains, legumes, and dairy will probably eventually find their tipping point.  That's the problem with processed food, it's loaded with grains (Wheat, corn), legumes(Soy and nuts), and dairy.  FYI, whey doesn't appear to be problematic, the problem with dairy appears to be the lactose and the casein.


----------



## Presser (Jun 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> ...There are mountains of research showing that those that consume less animal products and more unprocessed plant foods including legumes, vegetables, fruits and whole grains are much healthier than those that consume large amounts of animal products and processed foods...



That's not quite right IMO. I agree with including vegetables & fruits (in moderation) & excluding ALL processed foods, but you will be much better off without legumes & grains in your diet.

Sounds like you fell for "The China Study" fallacy.


----------



## troubador (Jun 11, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> The reason is irrelevant, the effect is still the same-longer life, less disease.



That's not even scientific. The blue zone thing is a hypothesis. Nothing about it shows effect.


----------



## hypo_glycemic (Jun 11, 2013)

Doesn't matter what's in milk--even though it's all crap unless it's raw--and raw milk doesn't last for more than 2 days, it's full of bacteria no matter how you cut it.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 11, 2013)

Presser said:


> That's not quite right IMO. I agree with including vegetables & fruits (in moderation) & excluding ALL processed foods, but you will be much better off without legumes & grains in your diet.
> 
> Sounds like you fell for "The China Study" fallacy.



fortunately, there are mountains of research that show a whole food, plant based diet that includes legumes and grains result in the lowest rates of disease as well as the humans that love the longest.

Are you able to produce any science that supports the claim that legumes and grains decrease health?


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 11, 2013)

troubador said:


> That's not even scientific. The blue zone thing is a hypothesis. Nothing about it shows effect.



It's a hypothesis, but becomes a strong one when you research the literature on a plant based diet and its effect on diabetes, obesity, heart disease, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia.

There are a ton of well executed studies addressing the effects of a plant based diet on the risk factors listed above.  I did my masters thesis on the subject.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 11, 2013)

Here's a great article about a plant based diet on diabetes for example.  It has a lot of studies listed below the article that cite this particular write up.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/78/3/610S.short


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 11, 2013)

A great article w great references on a plant based diet and heart disease.  If grains and legumes are unhealthy, why are the people eating them so healthy?

http://www.jacn.org/content/17/5/407.full


----------



## pjreiff (Jun 12, 2013)

Understand from your post that Raw Milk is not available in your area but wanted to pass along this link with some general information on benefits of raw milk...
A Campaign for Real Milk | A Project of the Weston A. Price Foundation


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 12, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> A great article w great references on a plant based diet and heart disease.  If grains and legumes are unhealthy, why are the people eating them so healthy?
> 
> Vegan Diets and Cardiovascular Health



Standard confound of epidemiological research.  Epidemiological research can be used to generate hypotheses but cannot be used to determine the direction of a relationship because all they do is show whether a relationship exists or not.  The answer to the question, "If grains and legumes are unhealthy, why do people who eat them live a long time?" is simple.  Because the gov't tells people that eating grains and legumes is healthy.  Who do you think is going to follow that advice?  It's typically people who exercise, don't overconsume alcohol, don't smoke, get 8 hours of sleep, etc.  In other words, it's just as possible that selection bias plays as much of a role as the grains and legumes themselves.  No statistical analysis is going to be able to tease all of those confounders out of the data.


----------



## troubador (Jun 12, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> A great article w great references on a plant based diet and heart disease.  If grains and legumes are unhealthy, why are the people eating them so healthy?
> 
> Vegan Diets and Cardiovascular Health



From the article...


> Several international studies have demonstrated that a plant-based diet is linked to a much lower risk of death from ischemic heart disease when compared to the general population


The problem with claiming the fact that the diet was plant-based is the reason for superiority should be obvious. Nutritional science has been really disappointing.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 12, 2013)

Dale Mabry said:


> Standard confound of epidemiological research.  Epidemiological research can be used to generate hypotheses but cannot be used to determine the direction of a relationship because all they do is show whether a relationship exists or not.  The answer to the question, "If grains and legumes are unhealthy, why do people who eat them live a long time?" is simple.  Because the gov't tells people that eating grains and legumes is healthy.  Who do you think is going to follow that advice?  It's typically people who exercise, don't overconsume alcohol, don't smoke, get 8 hours of sleep, etc.  In other words, it's just as possible that selection bias plays as much of a role as the grains and legumes themselves.  No statistical analysis is going to be able to tease all of those confounders out of the data.



Good points, but when you look at the research investigating the effect of a plant based diet on individual risk factors, the relationship becomes stronger.  If we have mountains of research on diet and specific variables like hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes etc (which we do) and we also have epidemiological research suggesting that populations that consume a mostly plant based diet are healthier and love longer, it's a pretty strong likelihood that there is cause and effect.

Additionally, if grains and legumes were unhealthy, it would be apparent in these individuals regardless if they exercise and avoid smoking, correct?


----------



## troubador (Jun 12, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> we also have epidemiological research suggesting that populations that consume a mostly plant based diet are healthier and love longer, it's a pretty strong likelihood that there is cause and effect.



You can only claim they're healthier than the control population. It's not much of a revelation that going vegan is healthier than eating corn dogs, pizza, and ice cream. Those studies you posted imply the experimental factor is meat vs. plant based diet and it's not.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 12, 2013)

troubador said:


> You can only claim they're healthier than the control population. It's not much of a revelation that going vegan is healthier than eating corn dogs, pizza, and ice cream. Those studies you posted imply the experimental factor is meat vs. plant based diet and it's not.



I agree, it's easy to be healthier than the average American.  I'm not advocating eating vegan, and I don't think the studies suggest that.  just pointing out that consuming vegetables, fruits, legumes and whole grains has been proven to be a healthy way of eating.  
The ones in this thread that suggest whole grains and legumes are unhealthy don't have much science to support their hypothesis.


----------



## troubador (Jun 12, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> The ones in this thread that suggest whole grains and legumes are unhealthy don't have much science to support their hypothesis.



Grains and legumes are some of the least nutrient dense unprocessed foods; actually you have to process grains and legumes to eat them but you know what I mean. They don't stack up well against meat and vegetables. They also contain compounds known to increase intestinal permeability and fuck up your gallbladder. They seem to contain more bioactive proteins that don't get digested and end up binding with receptors you don't want them to.

Gliadin, zonulin and gut permeability:... [Scand J Gastroenterol. 2006] - PubMed - NCBI

Duodenal phytohaemagglutinin (red kidney bean lectin) stimulates gallbladder contraction in humans - Purhonen - 2008 - Acta Physiologica - Wiley Online Library


> Lectins, carbohydrate-specific proteins without enzymatic activity on the ligand, are daily ingested plant proteins which survive the passage through the gastrointestinal tract in a biologically active form. Their binding to glycan determinants of natural glycoconjugates can trigger biological effects. The lectin phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) is abundantly present in red kidney beans and induces cholecystokinin (CCK) release in rats...


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 12, 2013)

troubador said:


> Grains and legumes are some of the least nutrient dense unprocessed foods; actually you have to process grains and legumes to eat them but you know what I mean. They don't stack up well against meat and vegetables. They also contain compounds known to increase intestinal permeability and fuck up your gallbladder. They seem to contain more bioactive proteins that don't get digested and end up binding with receptors you don't want them to.
> 
> Gliadin, zonulin and gut permeability:... [Scand J Gastroenterol. 2006] - PubMed - NCBI
> 
> Duodenal phytohaemagglutinin (red kidney bean lectin) stimulates gallbladder contraction in humans - Purhonen - 2008 - Acta Physiologica - Wiley Online Library



Lol, you think beans are nutrient less?  They're one of the most nutrient dense foods, high in fiber, protein and are considers one of the highest in antioxidants.
You think nuts aren't nutritious?  Are you being serious?


----------



## LAM (Jun 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Additionally, if grains and legumes were unhealthy, it would be apparent in these individuals regardless if they exercise and avoid smoking, correct?



the vast majority of the planet lives on those kinds of foods and they also have far less occurrences of cancers, etc. than in the heavily industrialized "polluted" country's of the west.

Cancer's Global Footprint | Visual.ly


----------



## troubador (Jun 13, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Lol, you think beans are nutrient less?  They're one of the most nutrient dense foods, high in fiber, protein and are considers one of the highest in antioxidants.


I'm talking about essential nutrients. 
 Legumes and grains are pretty weak when it comes to vitamins. Meat at least has the B vitamins. So yeah meat and vegetables tend to be more nutrient dense than grains and legumes. Although some legumes are pretty nutrient dense.

Here's a good video on the subject from Mathieu Lalonde, Ph.D (organic chemistry, Harvard)









> You think nuts aren't nutritious? Are you being serious?


Nuts are not grains or legumes. What are you talking about?


----------



## troubador (Jun 13, 2013)

A screenshot from the video I just posted.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 13, 2013)

troubador said:


> A screenshot from the video I just posted.



Nuts and seeds are listed close to the top.  

I'm not sure what your stance is, can you clarify?  Is a primary meat diet superior compared to a plant based diet in regards to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia?


----------



## _LG_ (Jun 14, 2013)

Unfortunately humans have severely hurt the quality of our meat by forcing animals to eat s diet based on corn wheat and soy.  Will you atleast admit this exphys?


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 14, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Good points, but when you look at the research investigating the effect of a plant based diet on individual risk factors, the relationship becomes stronger.  If we have mountains of research on diet and specific variables like hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes etc (which we do) and we also have epidemiological research suggesting that populations that consume a mostly plant based diet are healthier and love longer, it's a pretty strong likelihood that there is cause and effect.
> 
> Additionally, if grains and legumes were unhealthy, it would be apparent in these individuals regardless if they exercise and avoid smoking, correct?



Actually, not at all.  You can eat those things and live a fairly long, healthy life.  The question is do we thrive on them?  In that instance, epidemiological data or even between subjects data is fairly useless.  You would either need twin studies or very long within subjects studies which are never gonna happen.  We have quite a bit of metabolic flexibility and can get away with eating quite a variety of foods.  However, as long as something doesn't negatively impact our ability to reproduce, whether or not it gives you cancer at age 50 is irrelevant.  Through my research, I suspect that there is a tolerable dose of grains, legumes, and pasteurized dairy a person can eat without having problems.  This dosage will depend on how robust your immune system is, the shape your gut lining is in, your gut microbiota, and your age as all 3 are dependent on that.  The problem with the 3 offending nutrients mentioned is the proteins, they are hard to digest and could potentially lead to zonulin release.  Gluten certainly leads to zonulin release in everyone, but a larger and longer release for celiacs.  Zonulin dissolves the tight junctions between the cells of your intestinal wall and allows things that aren't supposed to be in your blood to get there, particularly lipopolysaccharide(LPS).  When LPS enters your blood it induces insulin resistance in your muscle and fat tissue to conserve glucose for the immune system.  This is a bad thing if you are inducing it long term.

Of the 3 offending nutrients, grains are the worst as they need to be processed and, therefore, also tend to contain sugars for pathogenic bacteria.  Legumes are next with soy being the worst of that category.  Look at the ingredients in processed food, they are loaded with grains(WHeat, corn), legumes(Soy, peanuts), and dairy.  Eating processed foods is merely a quicker way to exceed your tolerable dose.  There is some benefit to other legumes including the fiber that feeds beneficial bacteria in your gut that fights the pathogenic kind, but you are basically providing reinforcements for the good and bad guys.  Grains and legumes also have anti-nutrients that can block the absorption of other nutrients in the intestine.

I've seen some pretty amazing results getting clients off grains and legumes, some tolerate dairy and most tolerate raw dairy.  I had a client who wanted to try a program that had soy protein shakes 2-3 times a day.  I told her it was probably a bad idea but to give it a go if she wanted.  Three days in her hips were killing her any time she sat or laid down.  24 hours off the protein and it went away.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 14, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Nuts and seeds are listed close to the top.
> 
> I'm not sure what your stance is, can you clarify?  Is a primary meat diet superior compared to a plant based diet in regards to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia?



I would say the best diet provides primarily vegetables, a pound or less of animal a day, and carbs in the form of tuber and/or fruit.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 14, 2013)

troubador said:


> A screenshot from the video I just posted.



I liked his presentation this year.  He was a dick to that kid, though.


----------



## troubador (Jun 14, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> Nuts and seeds are listed close to the top.
> 
> I'm not sure what your stance is, can you clarify?  Is a primary meat diet superior compared to a plant based diet in regards to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia?



I never said nuts weren't nutrient dense or that a diet should be primarily meat. I meant exactly what I wrote. I'm not sure what needs clarification. I'm not subliminally trying to get you to join my transcendental meat cult.


----------



## troubador (Jun 14, 2013)

Dale Mabry said:


> I liked his presentation this year.  He was a dick to that kid, though.



Well that kid was a bitch so it's only natural.


----------



## Presser (Jun 17, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> fortunately, there are mountains of research that show a whole food, plant based diet that includes legumes and grains result in the lowest rates of disease as well as the humans that love the longest.



Wrong.

"..if vegetarian diets are so healthful, then any reasonable person might expect that people eating plant based diets would have lower death rates from all causes than their meat eating counterparts.  This question was never fully answered until 1999 when Dr. Key and colleagues at Oxford University conducted a large meta analysis comparing overall death rates between 27, 808 vegetarians and 48,364 meat eaters.  I quote Dr. Key?s study, ?There were no significant differences between vegetarians and non-vegetarians in mortality from cerebrovascular disease, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer or all other causes combined?.  I have underlined and bolded the last words of this sentence to emphasize the fact that vegetarians do not fare any better than their hamburger eating counterparts when death rates for all causes are considered.  A more recent 2009 analysis (The EPIC-Oxford Study), employing the largest sample of vegetarians (33,883) ever examined came up with identical conclusions.   I quote the authors, ?Within the study mortality from circulatory diseases and all causes is not significantly different between vegetarians and meat eaters?.  The results of this study and the earlier meta analysis fly directly in the face of the American Dietetic Association?s suggestion that ?vegetarian and vegan diets may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain disease?.

What To Say To A Vegan - Super Human Radio Health Talk Show : Internet Radio Talk station




exphys88 said:


> Are you able to produce any science that supports the claim that legumes and grains decrease health?



Yes. Grains & legumes contain lectins, phytates & gulten which has been shown to be detrimental.

*Lectins* are bad. They bind to insulin receptors, attack the stomach lining of insects, bind to human intestinal lining, and they seemingly cause leptin resistance. And leptin resistance predicts a ?worsening of the features of the metabolic syndrome independently of obesity?. Fun stuff, huh?

*Gluten *might be even worse. Gluten, found in wheat, rye, and barley, is a composite of the proteins gliadin and glutenin. Around 1% of the population are celiacs, people who are completely and utterly intolerant of any gluten. In celiacs, any gluten in the diet can be disastrous. We?re talking compromised calcium and vitamin D3 levels, hyperparathyroidism, bone defects. Really terrible stuff. And it gets worse: just because you?re not celiac doesn?t mean you aren?t susceptible to the ravages of gluten. As Stephan highlights, one study showed that 29% of asymptomatic (read: not celiac) people nonetheless tested positive for anti-gliadin IgA in their stool. Anti-gliadin IgA is an antibody produced by the gut, and it remains there until it?s dispatched to ward off gliadin ? a primary component of gluten. Basically, the only reason anti-gliadin IgA ends up in your stool is because your body sensed an impending threat ? gluten. If gluten poses no threat, the anti-gliadin IgA stays in your gut. And to think, most Americans eat this stuff on a daily basis.

*Phytates* are a problem, too, because they make minerals bio-_un_available (so much for all those healthy vitamins and minerals we need from whole grains!), thus rendering null and void the last, remaining argument for cereal grain consumption.

*Why Grains Are Unhealthy | Mark's Daily Apple

*[FONT=Lucida Grande, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If you take a purely anthropological look, you will see that the neolithic era (farming and increased carbohydrate consumption) resulted in the fossil remains of those of the era being smaller in height, less bone density, and tooth decay. Farming caused a huge back-step in our evolution. I think the scientific evidence speaks volumes on this topic.


[/FONT]


----------



## Presser (Jun 17, 2013)

Any plant based diet is going to derive most it's calories from carbohydrates & IMO that is the wrong direction for health we should be taking our diets. You are looking at increased of a host of health problems including obesity & diabetes. 

Please watch the presentation to help understand why carbohydrates increase our risk of cancer, and please share this link.

Craig B. Thompson, President and CEO of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, discusses new ways to think about cancer and how cancer arises in human beings.

Excerpt:

At 27:00 of the presentation:

"We are starting to understand it matters what you eat. ...It matter where your calories come from.... We now have good evidence in model organisms. If you overfeed someone with fat you don't increase their cancer risk at all. You overfeed somebody with carbohydrates and you dramatically increase their cancer rate and protein is halfway in between. And that is why we are going to have a huge debate about these carbohydrate based diets."

[video=youtube;WUlE1VHGA40]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WUlE1VHGA40[/video]


----------



## dave 236 (Jun 17, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> It's a hypothesis, but becomes a strong one when you research the literature on a plant based diet and its effect on diabetes, obesity, heart disease, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia.
> 
> There are a ton of well executed studies addressing the effects of a plant based diet on the risk factors listed above.  I did my masters thesis on the subject.



Correlation can never prove causation. Thats all blue zones are is a correlation. Im sure you learned this somewhere on the way to a masters as well.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 18, 2013)

dave 236 said:


> Correlation can never prove causation. Thats all blue zones are is a correlation. Im sure you learned this somewhere on the way to a masters as well.



Of course, but you're ignoring the ton of studies showing that a plant based diet has been associated with low rates of diabetes, heart disease, obesity, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia, and has been to shown to cure type 2 diabetes and actually reverse coronary atherosclerosis.


----------



## exphys88 (Jun 18, 2013)

Dale Mabry said:


> Actually, not at all.  You can eat those things and live a fairly long, healthy life.  The question is do we thrive on them?  In that instance, epidemiological data or even between subjects data is fairly useless.  You would either need twin studies or very long within subjects studies which are never gonna happen.  We have quite a bit of metabolic flexibility and can get away with eating quite a variety of foods.  However, as long as something doesn't negatively impact our ability to reproduce, whether or not it gives you cancer at age 50 is irrelevant.  Through my research, I suspect that there is a tolerable dose of grains, legumes, and pasteurized dairy a person can eat without having problems.  This dosage will depend on how robust your immune system is, the shape your gut lining is in, your gut microbiota, and your age as all 3 are dependent on that.  The problem with the 3 offending nutrients mentioned is the proteins, they are hard to digest and could potentially lead to zonulin release.  Gluten certainly leads to zonulin release in everyone, but a larger and longer release for celiacs.  Zonulin dissolves the tight junctions between the cells of your intestinal wall and allows things that aren't supposed to be in your blood to get there, particularly lipopolysaccharide(LPS).  When LPS enters your blood it induces insulin resistance in your muscle and fat tissue to conserve glucose for the immune system.  This is a bad thing if you are inducing it long term.
> 
> Of the 3 offending nutrients, grains are the worst as they need to be processed and, therefore, also tend to contain sugars for pathogenic bacteria.  Legumes are next with soy being the worst of that category.  Look at the ingredients in processed food, they are loaded with grains(WHeat, corn), legumes(Soy, peanuts), and dairy.  Eating processed foods is merely a quicker way to exceed your tolerable dose.  There is some benefit to other legumes including the fiber that feeds beneficial bacteria in your gut that fights the pathogenic kind, but you are basically providing reinforcements for the good and bad guys.  Grains and legumes also have anti-nutrients that can block the absorption of other nutrients in the intestine.
> 
> I've seen some pretty amazing results getting clients off grains and legumes, some tolerate dairy and most tolerate raw dairy.  I had a client who wanted to try a program that had soy protein shakes 2-3 times a day.  I told her it was probably a bad idea but to give it a go if she wanted.  Three days in her hips were killing her any time she sat or laid down.  24 hours off the protein and it went away.



What is the difference between living long healthy lives and thriving?  

I've seen heart patients avoid bypass surgery by switching to a plant based diet that was high in grains and legumes.  I've also seen patients completely reverse their diabetes by switching to a high carb plant based diet.  I've personally dropped my cholesterol from 260 to 165, my triglycerides from 400 to 140, and my hypertension from approximately 140/85 to approximately 115/75 by eating vegan for just 3 months.  My CRP also went down. 
But, these are just testimonials and should mean anything.


----------



## sneedham (Jun 18, 2013)

I say raw milk...Straight from the cow......Check the link out....
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...=wMCZvdiLazWyNJ7zUkTDvA&bvm=bv.47883778,d.eWU


----------



## Presser (Jun 19, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> I've personally dropped my cholesterol from 260 to 165,...
> But, these are just testimonials and should mean anything.



According to the chart linked below you has substantially INCREASED your risk of all cause mortality. Anyone who thinks "getting cholesterol (total) low" is healthy, demonstrates a lack of knowledge on this subject.

cholesterol-mortality-chart.pdf


----------



## Presser (Jun 19, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> ...by eating vegan for just 3 months.



Vegan & vegetarian diets are low fat / high carb, a bad combination.

Excerpt:
"Low-fat, high-carb diets raise ?bad? cholesterol and lower ?good? cholesterol
Here?s where the story gets even more interesting. And tragic.

Researchers working in this area have defined what they call Pattern A and Pattern B. Pattern A is when small, dense LDL is low, large, buoyant LDL is high, and HDL is high. Pattern B is when small, dense LDL is high, HDL is low, and triglycerides are high. Pattern B is strongly associated with increased risk of heart disease, whereas Pattern A is not.

It is not saturated fat or cholesterol that increases the amount of small, dense LDL we have in our blood. It?s carbohydrate."

The most important thing you probably don?t know about cholesterol

Did you get a VAP cholesterol test or an NMR Lipoprofile test when you had your cholesterol checked? If not you will never know what your LDL pattern is.

A vegan diet can never and will never prove to be a valid way to long-term health else there would be at least one traditional culture that practiced it successfully with multiple generations of fertility, healthy children, and degenerative and chronic disease free people demonstrating it?s positive effect.

Such a culture did not & does not exist.


----------



## ItzLouGunz (Jun 19, 2013)

Muscle Milk!


----------



## Dale Mabry (Jun 19, 2013)

exphys88 said:


> What is the difference between living long healthy lives and thriving?
> 
> I've seen heart patients avoid bypass surgery by switching to a plant based diet that was high in grains and legumes.  I've also seen patients completely reverse their diabetes by switching to a high carb plant based diet.  I've personally dropped my cholesterol from 260 to 165, my triglycerides from 400 to 140, and my hypertension from approximately 140/85 to approximately 115/75 by eating vegan for just 3 months.  My CRP also went down.
> But, these are just testimonials and should mean anything.



Living and thriving are 2 separate things.  It's quite possible to live a long healthy life but it still not be optimal.  My point is, you can do all that you wrote by eating whole, unprocessed food including appropriately raised animals.  Meat has nothing to do with it and you absolutely need meat for B12 and Omega 3s (ALA from plants is converted to Omega 3s at a 5% rate..That's a ton of flax).  I've seen people reverse diabetes with a Paleo diet, and it happens much faster than a plant based diet.  FYI, your TGs are still too high.  I know they set the number at <150 but anything over 100 is not good.  Also, I would put a ton more stock in my TG and HDL number than cholesterol.  Optimally you want an TG:HDL ratio of 2 or less which you can accomplish with your TG number, but I find anything over 100 is still not good.  However, it is rare for someone to have TGs over 400 and be able to bring them as low as you have which is awesome.

Here is a blog I wrote on T2D :

Synergy Health & Wellness: A new understanding of Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular disease

FYI, you can eat whole unprocessed grains and legumes and probably be fine as long as they are soaked.  While they contain proteins that are bad, they provide fiber which heals the damage  As you get older, your ability to do this will decrease dramatically as your immune system loses effectiveness and you will probably have to gradually lower your dose.


----------



## skel1977 (Jun 24, 2013)

I read this on stronglifts a few months ago.  Dug it up


*Milk Content. *1 cup (250ml) whole milk contains 8g protein, 13g carbs & 8g fat for a total of 150kcal. 1 cup also has 290mg calcium & 107g sodium. This combo makes milk perfect for lean body mass gains & recovery. Full content:

*Casein.* Slow digesting protein. Milk consists for 80% of casein, a dairy protein that keeps you full longer and helps fat loss & muscle repair.
*Whey.* Fast digesting protein. Milk consists for 20% of whey which helps muscle repair. This is the same kind of whey you find in protein shakes.
*BCAA.* Milk is rich in branched chain amino acids : leucine, isoleucine and valine. A diet rich in protein, especially dairy protein like milk, will get you plenty of BCAAs. No need to waste your money on supplements.
*Carbs.* Milk contains lactose. Your body uses this sugar to replenish your energy stores. Some can't digest lactose. Check the tips at the bottom.
*Fat.* Unless you go fat-free, milk contains 1 to 3g fat per 100ml. Fats digest slowly and keep you full longer, thus decreasing hunger.
*Calcium.* Dairy calcium increases fat loss & improves bone health. The latter is especially important if you're a woman (osteoporosis).
*Water. *Milk is about 87% water. Proper hydration improves muscle recovery and can increase strength by preventing fatigue & stalling.
*Electrolytes. *Milk contains sodium & potassium. These minerals improve re-hydration by retaining the fluids you consume post workout.
*Nutrients. Biotin, magnesium, vitamin A, vitamin B-12, vitamin D, vitamin K, riboflavin and many others (naturally or through fortification).*
*
 5 Reasons You Should Drink Milk Post Workout.*


*Muscle Gains. *Research shows a mix of slow and fast digesting protein is superior for lean body mass gains. Milk is 80% casein, 20% whey.
*Fat Loss.* Dairy calcium increases fat loss. The fat in milk keeps you full longer which decreases hunger and thus helps you to lose fat.
*Recovery*. Milk is a fluid and has electrolytes. Research shows milk is superior to water and sport drinks for rehydration post workout.
*Cheap. *When you consider the protein (whey/casein/BCAA) and calorie content of milk, it's one of the cheapest foods available.
*Easy. *Milk requires zero preparation. 1 quarter (1 liter) milk can be a perfect post workout meal depending on your daily caloric needs.


Why Milk Is The Ultimate Post Workout Food | StrongLifts StrongLifts


----------



## cdan19 (Jun 24, 2013)




----------



## aquaprin90 (Jun 26, 2013)

Yes, dairy products contains fat, so they must not be consumed too much and besides this eat and drink anything but in limited quantity as too-much of anything can be bad for health.


----------



## Presser (Jun 26, 2013)

aquaprin90 said:


> Yes, dairy products contains fat, so they must not be consumed too much and besides this eat and drink anything but in limited quantity as too-much of anything can be bad for health.



Please explain why  dairy "fat" is bad. I suggest you back that claim up with scientific evidence and not some opinionated article WITHOUT citations.


----------



## troubador (Jun 26, 2013)

aquaprin90 said:


> Yes, dairy products contains fat, so they must not be consumed too much and besides this eat and drink anything but in limited quantity as too-much of anything can be bad for health.



Good point, drinking 12 gallons or more of milk a day can be detrimental to your health. Also try to keep your servings of broccoli under 42 lbs.


----------



## skel1977 (Jun 27, 2013)

lol


----------

