dairy proteins

The reasons why it's excluded from this diet
nick
Moderator
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue 09 Aug 2005 00:01

Postby nick » Tue 25 Jul 2006 16:21

It has been shown that in all milk consuming countries osteoporosis incidence is highest.
And?

What does this tell us?

That correlation proves causation? No.

There are other factors involved here, and especially if the largest milk consuming countries (europe) also happen to receive very little sunshine or vitamin D exposure, which is essential for proper assimilation of calcium.
True. Even in countries where women have to wear clothes that cover their entire body they still absorb sufficient Vit. D from their diet. Sunshine isn't the only source.

Even in countries with a high calcium intake the fact that their hip-fracture rate is higher at least shows that more calcium isn't better or healthier.
It also has been shown that in all milk consuming countries average bone mineral desnity is greatest. And that high calcium intakes increase bone mineral density.
And this would be bad, how?
Just like your skin ages faster the more you suntan the sooner will your bones grow older and become porous with the higher amounts of calcium you ingest. Even though you'll have strong bones (high BMD), much like a beautiful tan, your only accellerating the renewal rate so that when your older your bones will have been exhausted.

You probably need to read why calcium has this direct effect on bone metabolism in the theory of it.
http://www.4.waisays.com
curiousz
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun 02 Apr 2006 22:42

Postby curiousz » Wed 26 Jul 2006 08:26

That theory on calcium seems to be as bogus as a theory that muscle degeneration will occur if you workout throughout your lifetime and you will then not have the ability to move because your muscles are wasted.
However, if you consume some fish and / or egg yolk once in a while, you'll absorb all the vitamin D you need - even living in Greenland, Canada or Northern Europe.
Vitamin D of primitive diets, especially in areas where they received little sunlight, were extremely high (~10 times the daily requirements for the average american).

You'd have to consume a significant amount of eggs, and the liver of the fish, in order to get an 'optimal level' of vitamin D.

So, I do not agree with the assertion that casually consuming some fish or some eggs will provide enough vitamin D. It may be enough vitamin D to prevent rickets, but not enough to provide optimal bone integrity. You'd need to consume lots. And primitive diets did consume a lot. Modern diets do not.
curiousz
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun 02 Apr 2006 22:42

Postby curiousz » Wed 26 Jul 2006 08:28

Now that we have that out of the way, let's hear YOUR explanation
for the fact that the Masai tribe of Africa drink a LOT more milk than
500 lbs a year, but have little osteoporosis. And the fact that
osteoporosis is less frequent in Asian countries amoung women who drink
at least some milk.
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Postby Oscar » Wed 26 Jul 2006 11:50

What I find interesting, is that you ask for proof, but you yourself offer none.

About the Masai: at what age does osteoporosis normally start to show? 70? Let's say 60. Or even 50. The Masai don't live to that age.
I'm sure that if you look at people under 20 in countries with high milk consumption, you will find little osteoporosis either. ;D
nick
Moderator
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue 09 Aug 2005 00:01

Postby nick » Wed 26 Jul 2006 15:28

curiousz wrote:Now that we have that out of the way, let's hear YOUR explanation
for the fact that the Masai tribe of Africa drink a LOT more milk than
500 lbs a year, but have little osteoporosis. And the fact that
osteoporosis is less frequent in Asian countries amoung women who drink
at least some milk.
I'll let RRM answer the Vit. D question as it is his original theory.

The key words are less frequent.
The Asian women at least drink some milk so that it could be seen as having a preventative effect on osteoporosis or seen as having a small effect on promoting osteoporosis, thus making osteoporosis less frequent in asian women compared to other women who drink more calcium and thus more osteoporosis.

It could go either way, but when looking at international statistics you can see that the more milk you drink it doesn't prevent osteoporosis at the very least.

The evidence on how ostoeblasts are stimulated by calcium also plays an important role in how bone cells can be used up so that it eventually exhausts them to where irreversible bone decline occurs.

Did you read and understand these concepts?
What is so bogus about the theory?

You say that there is no proof but what about the statistics that in countries that consume little to low-moderate amounts of milk that the hip-fracture rate is markedly decreased or practically absent?

Apparently, from what you have said about the Masai they don't live that long. Osteoporosis is a lifetime longterm disease. So perhaps they have really strong bones but that is because they consume much dairy and since they die younger they don't get osteoporosis.

This is doesn't refute the theory!
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8158
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Postby RRM » Mon 31 Jul 2006 18:49

curiousz wrote:And?

If you consume all parts of an animal, then you would likely consume organ meats.
Yes, but the high-hormone organs are just a small part of the whole. Consuming all the other meat will strongly bring down the average. Also, the high-hormone organs are not high in hormones when compared to milk.
Primitive cultures of man consumed organ meats, and I'm sure other carnivores consume organ meat.
Please show me data of one particular organ high in hormones.
Err. Yes it does. Especially with the other nutrients and enzymes that are destroyed by the pasteurization process.
Are you saying that calcium from pasteurized milk is less well or better utilized?
There are other factors involved here, and especially if the largest milk consuming countries (europe) also happen to receive very little sunshine or vitamin D exposure, which is essential for proper assimilation of calcium.
Italy, for example, which is much sunnier than Poland, has a higher osteoporosis rate (the Italians consume more milk).
Only a lack of vitamin D (we are talking about a deficiency here) may cause osteoporosis due to hyperparathyroidism.
Vitamin D deficiency is very rare, unlike osteoporosis.
And this would be bad, how?
Maintaining a high bone mineral density comes with high osteoblast apoptosis rates (which means accelerated aging of those cells that need to compose pre-calcified matrix)
That theory on calcium seems to be as bogus as a theory that muscle degeneration will occur if you workout throughout your lifetime and you will then not have the ability to move because your muscles are wasted.
If you work out excessively, you will pay the prize eventually.
Lifetime hard physical labor has been proven to be detrimental.
Excessive sunlight exposure also has been proven to accelerate aging of your skin.
Vitamin D of primitive diets, especially in areas where they received little sunlight, were extremely high (~10 times the daily requirements for the average american). You'd have to consume a significant amount of eggs, and the liver of the fish, in order to get an 'optimal level' of vitamin D.
The relation between vitamin D and osteoporosis is not in high levels (or not), but in vitamin D deficiency, which is rare.

So, I do not agree with the assertion that casually consuming some fish or some eggs will provide enough vitamin D.
This can never result in vitamin D deficiency.
It may be enough vitamin D to prevent rickets, but not enough to provide optimal bone integrity.
You dont get stronger/healthier bones by consuming more vitamin D. Just a lack of vitamin D may result in decreasing bone integrity.
The highest incidence of osteoporosis are also found in Scandinavian countries where fish consumption is highest.
And the fact that osteoporosis is less frequent in Asian countries amoung women who drink at least some milk.
Less frequent than in high milk consuming (western) countries, but MORE frequent than in asian and african countries where even less milk is consumed.
Thats the whole issue; the less milk is consumed, the less osteoporosis incidence.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest