Image Credit: Pixabay. This image has been modified.

What Happens if You Add Milk to Tea?

Our endothelium, the inner lining of our blood vessels that controls the function of every artery in our body, “appears to play a critical role in a variety of human disorders, including peripheral vascular disease, stroke, heart disease, diabetes, insulin resistance, chronic kidney failure, [cancer, and blood clots]….” Unfortunately, endothelial cells only live about 30 years, and their replacements don’t seem to function as well. So, “[a]s men and women approach the ages of 40 and 50, there is a progressive decline in endothelial function.” At age 50 or 60, we “can no longer tolerate this risk-factor burden that [we] were once able to tolerate at age 10 or 20,” thanks to this progressive decline in endothelial function.

Or, at least, that’s what we used to think.

As I discuss in my video Tea and Artery Function, there are increasing data to suggest that age is not an immutable risk factor—the decline in artery function is not just an inevitable consequence of aging Researchers did not see the same progressive decline in a Chinese population studied. The older Chinese people in their 60s had the arterial function of young folks in their 20s. “These data suggest that progressive endothelial dysfunction is not an inevitable consequence of aging but might be related to prolonged exposure to environmental factors more prevalent in westernized countries than in China.” What could it be? Traditional Chinese diets include green tea, which has been shown to have a beneficial effect on endothelial function within 30 minutes of consumption, lasting about two hours. It wasn’t the caffeine, which alone had no effect. They suspect it was the flavonoid phytonutrients in the leaves.

Black tea appears to work about just as well as green tea, but then why is green tea associated with lower heart disease risk while black tea is not? In fact, in two British studies, tea consumption was associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease. Maybe it’s because the Brits commonly drink their tea with milk, whereas green tea is typically drank straight? If only there were a country that drank black tea, but without milk. There is. The Netherlands. In those studies, black tea was associated with the same drop in risk as the green tea studies. So, maybe it is the milk. But you can’t really know until you put it to the test.

Researchers found the “addition of milk to black tea completely prevents the biological activity of tea in terms of improvement of endothelial function.” So, that could explain it. It appears the milk protein casein is the culprit, though soy protein was recently found to have the same nutrient binding effect. The European Society of Cardiology issued a press release about the study showing the protective effect of tea “is totally wiped out by adding milk” and suggested consumers should consider cutting down. Milk-drinkers were not amused: “As long as the reported results are not confirmed in a fair number of humans who drink their tea outside the lab setting, we will continue to add milk to ours.” The researchers responded, challenging the notion that their study wasn’t big enough. They had 16 subjects, and the results were highly significant. Across those 16 people, the “addition of milk to tea not only reduced, but completely blunted the effects of tea….The rationale for drinking tea in a lab setting was that only under these conditions could the influence of other beverages and food be controlled for.” They were doing an experiment after all. Were they supposed to drag the equipment to a Starbucks or something?

“As doctors,” the milky tea drinkers asserted, “we would not prescribe a new drug to patients if it was studied only in one small study. In analogy, milk abstinence should not be recommended to tea drinkers…” They apparently were forgetting that the reason we don’t prescribe drugs without overwhelming evidence is that drugs can kill. So the benefits better outweigh the risks, but what’s the downside of a little milk abstinence?


If this is what one plant can do, imagine the effects of a whole diet centered around plant foods. That’s the subject of my video Plant-Based Diets and Artery Function.

Do be careful about green tea from China if you eat the leaves, though. See Lead Contamination of Tea.

I answer other questions you may have about tea in these videos:

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations:

Discuss

Michael Greger M.D., FACLM

Michael Greger, M.D. FACLM, is a physician, New York Times bestselling author, and internationally recognized professional speaker on a number of important public health issues. Dr. Greger has lectured at the Conference on World Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and the International Bird Flu Summit, testified before Congress, appeared on The Dr. Oz Show and The Colbert Report, and was invited as an expert witness in defense of Oprah Winfrey at the infamous "meat defamation" trial.


286 responses to “What Happens if You Add Milk to Tea?

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. I like to drink my black tea with plant based “milk” (oat, soy etc.). Does this have also a negative effect? I don’t think so, because no casein…. Or am I wrong?

    1. A squeeze of lemon in tea not only makes it taste awesome but also helps you absorb the full benefits of the tea. Alternately, drink your tea the way you like it and don’t sweat the small stuff. If you’re eating a healthy diet, adding a little milk to your tea won’t matter one way or the other.

    2. Ed,

      I am going to disagree slightly with Hal’s answer.

      Drinking it with soy milk, you aren’t going to see Green Tea’s beneficial protective effects on your health.

      However, I think you are wondering about this part: “In fact, in two British studies, tea consumption was associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease.” I believe that the increased risk of coronary artery disease is because of the Casein.

  2. Deju vu all over again. :-)

    Now there’ll be a slew of questions about adding other “milks” — ie., “Well, how about hemp milk then?”

    As I’ve opined in your other tea/coffee vids, coffee and tea should be taken straight, with nothing added. (I like black tea more than I do green tea.)

    1. Yes YR, I’m not about to get my apron in a knot over green tea issues. This is one of the studies that Dr Greger sourced, and they say one subcategory of catechins increased with the use of milk! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22366739 Plus, green tea is not the only catechin game in town.. goji berries, blackberries and the leaves of blackberries and raspberries, dark chocolate, cocoa powder, pecans, and many more supply as much or more than green tea. Matcha is ok with a little sugar to take the edge off.

      1. Yes, Barb. I also have seen multiple studies (usually from people associated with the industry) that show that adding cow’s milk or whatever to green tea increased catechin absorption. I am sure that it is true.
        It is however also a distraction. The point of this blog post is not about catechin absorption, it is about the effect of tea consumption on endothelial function …. and the observed rates of cardiovascular diease in people who drink tea without milk versus those who drink it with milk of some kind. That’s why I think industry studies showing polyphenol/catechin absorption is not affected by the addition of milk to tea, are simply distractions (deliberate or otherwise) from the key issue which is its effect on the hard endoints of human health – death, heart attacks, strokes, cancer etc.
        For that matter, who drinks green tea with milk anyway? So, why study it?

        1. Thanks MrFumbleFingers, you brought up good points. When I read the study, I saw that there were several ‘types’ of catechins, and some were affected by soy and one was not. This doesn’t matter to me other than in drinking my afternoon matcha which I enjoy with soy milk, and I thought for a moment all was not lost in continuing to do so. I have not as yet aquired a taste for green tea, so I was happy also to find that catechins are found in many other food sources (even affordable ones, like apples) so it’s all good.

          1. OK, thanks Barb

            I wasn’t aware that anybody drank green tea or matcha with milk of any kind – until now anyway. It must be that I’ve led a sheltered existence and don’t get out enough.

        2. Just how high are the fluoride levels in tea? Since fluoride is bioaccumlative in the body, how potentially harmful could this be? Because the fluoride in tea cross the blood brain barrier and lodges in the Pineal Gland (where it acts as and antagonist with aluminum and tin causing these also to be deposited) should tea be reguarded as not causing harm?

          1. Hi, Mo! Currently, the suggested upper limit for fluoride in drinking water is 2 parts per million, and the mandatory upper limit is 4 parts per million. Herbal teas are about a hundred-fold under this limit and are therefore considered safe. Caffeinated teas however exceed the suggested limit and decaf teas exceed the mandatory limit. For context though, the limits established for drinking water are based on water being consumed all day long as one’s primary beverage. Fluoride risk from tea would be more of a concern if tea is being consumed as the primary source of hydration. For more information, see here: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/childhood-tea-drinking-may-increase-fluorosis-risk/.
            There has been a reported case of a woman developing fluoride toxicity from tea (https://nutritionfacts.org/video/overdosing-on-tea/); she was drinking one to two gallons of double strength tea every day of her adult life, or the equivalent of about 30 to 60 cups of regular tea a day. Based on an analysis of fluoride levels in five brands of bottled tea (https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(04)00601-1/fulltext), Dr. Greger recommends that people drink no more than ten cups of tea per day.

            1. Thanks Lea G.

              There are other (heavy) metals in green tea including lead. Lead contamination may be a particular probkem with Japanese green tea.
              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4762913/

              Matcha is high inntioxidants in the first place. According to the Healthline website

              “One study found that matcha contains up to 137 times more antioxidants than a low-grade variety of green tea, and up to 3 times more antioxidants than other high-quality teas (10).”

              I imagine that the matcha process also makes green tea antioxidants much more bioavailable because the tea leaves are ground into a powder and then consumed. With ordeinary green tea, on the other hand, the leaves themselves are not consumed only the liquid in which the leaves are steeped.

              However, I would think that the heavy metals in green tea are also much more bioavailable if matcha is consumed, for much the same reasons. Also, quoting Healthline again

              “Some individuals have shown signs of liver toxicity after consuming just 6 cups of green tea daily for 4 months, equaling about 2 daily cups of matcha (42).”

              My own totally unscientific opinion is that we don’t have anough information on the long term safety of matcha consumption to make me want to include it in my daily regime. However, Dr Greger is apparently a big fan of matcha and considers it super healthy
              https://nutritionfacts.org/video/is-matcha-good-for-you/

              Are there any plans for a video/blog post on matcha tea consumption and any associated risks from contaminants?

    2. YR, I also drink my tea and coffee straight. And am, of course, animal milk free, including cheese and other such products derived from animal milks. T. Colin Campbell has some good research studies showing how animal milk is definitely not good for humans, except, of course, human mother’s milk for their babies, which is excellent!

  3. Isn’t this the cue for Pete Granger to reappear with comments about how cow’s milk is wonderfully nutritious and healthy?

    1. Go on Tom, admit it. You miss me :) I have replied, but I guess I have been sin-binned by the censors, at least temporarily. Lets see if it gets there any quicker if I go right to the top….

      Peter Granger says: October 25th, 2018 at 7:30 pm

      Those inclined to follow Dr Gs advice on this subject would be wise to read the following: In response to criticism of their methodology, the quoted author (Lorenz et al) concede their study was next to useless:

      ‘As we have shown in Table 2 of our paper, tea catechins become complexed as soon as milk is added to tea. Whether these complexes are broken down after digestion of the caseins and whether the catechins are subsequently released and absorbed later on represent interesting questions’.

      ‘We are also aware of the study by van het Hof et al.,6 who did not observe a difference in plasma catechin concentrations after consumption of black tea with or without milk. This objection needs to be further investigated’.

      ‘A plausible explanation of the fact that we observed an impairment of FMD response after addition of milk to tea may be that the catechins, owing to the longer retention period in the digestive tract, could have been modified and thus rendered physiologically inactive. The suggestion by the authors to measure the vasodilatory response at later time points is an important issue that should be addressed in future studies’.

      https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/28/10/1266/2887455.

      In other words, the author’s excluded the possibility that the complexes formed between milk proteins and tea flavanols are broken down during digestion. Other studies demonstrate that this is precisely what occurs Moreover, an earlier study by van Hof et al found milk had no effect on plasma catechin concentrations:

      ‘Addition of milk to black tea (100 ml in 600 ml) did not significantly affect the blood catechin levels (areas under the curves (mean (CVM) of 0.53 h. micromol/l (11%) vs 0.60 h. micromol/l (9%) for black tea and black tea with milk respectively’.

      ‘Conclusion: Catechins from green tea and black tea are rapidly absorbed and milk does not impair the bioavailability of tea catechins’.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9630386

      Other shortcomings with the Lorenz study include the following:

      1. The researchers used skimmed milk. Given interactions between milk fats and proteins, this is hardly a reliable indicator of the effects of full or low fat milk on tea catechins. (fats can enhance the absorption and change the absorption kinetics of polyphenols – 2014, Zhang et al – https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/interaction-of-plant-phenols-with-food-macronutrients-characterisation-and-nutritionalphysiological-consequences

      2. The improvement in FMD with black tea consumption (without milk) is only 3.5%, which is minimal in any event. Similar increases in FMD follow consumption of a high-flavanol cocoa drink, oral ingestion of epicatechin, consumption of dark chocolate, and drinking of white and red wine.

      3. Tea flavan-3-ols include not only catechin, but also epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin, epigallocatechin gallate, proanthocyanidins, theaflavins and thearubigins. The bioavailability of most if not all of these flavanols are IMPROVED with the addition of milk to black tea.

      4. Not all polyphenols are complexed with milk proteins ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24001682), and the antioxidant activity of all polyphenols INCREASES after the addition of alpha-casein (from 6% to 75%) (Zhang et al, 2014)

      5. There are many complex macronutrient synergies occurring between tea and other nutrients in the diet. For example, carbohydrates enhance the absorption and extend the time needed to reach a maximal plasma concentration of polyphenols (Zhang et al)

      6. Research (Xie et al, Oct 2013, Bourassa et al, 2013, Moser et al, December 2014) demonstrate that when adding milk to tea (i.e., pre-consumption) milk minerals immediately increase tea flavanol bioaccessibility, milk protein (casein) reduce tea flavanol bioaccessibility – but the latter is completely reversed during human digestion (post consumption). Thus, the addition of milk increases (not decreases) the net bioavailability of tea polyphenols.

      The following is the effect of adding milk to tea and consuming (subject to other nutritional synergies). By complexing, milk protein initially DECREASES the bioaccessability of flavan-3-ols. However, counteracting this:

      1. Milk minerals INCREASE flavanol bioaccesability – even prior to digestion

      2. Post-consumption digestion breaks down these complexes, making polyphenols fully bioavailable.

      ‘Milk protein, most notably S-CSN, significantly decreased (p < 0.05) bioaccessibility of flavan-3-ols relative to JK buffer controls (10 relative to 32%). Interestingly, the presence of milk minerals significantly INCREASED (p < 0.05) flavan-3-ol bioaccessibility compared to that of controls (32 relative to 18%). These data combined with SDS-PAGE and fluorometric analyses suggest that both milk proteins and minerals may alter flavan-3-ol bioaccessibility, but normal GI digestion appears to minimize the impact of specific protein interactions’.

      Moser et al, 2014: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996914006188

      ‘To summarize, these data suggest that milk addition may increase catechin bioavailability by enhancing their transepithelial absorption and uptake from green tea extract’.

      Xie et al, 2013: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996912003079

      ‘using lipid peroxidation method, we noticed of the antioxidant activity of all the polyphenols changed (from 6% up to 75%) after the addition of alpha-casein. The results show using this method the larger gallate esters containing polyphenols epicatechingallate (ECG) and (epigallocatechingallate (EGCG) were less affected by the presence of casein than smaller polyphenols catechins (C), epicatechin (EC) and epicgallocatechine (EGC).

      Bourassa et al, 2013: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24001682

      ‘when plant phenols are consumed along with food macronutrients, the bioavailability and bioactivity of polyphenols can be significantly affected. The protein–polyphenol complexes can significantly change the plasma kinetics profile but do not affect the absorption of polyphenols.
      Carbohydrates can enhance the absorption and extend the time needed to reach a maximal plasma concentration of polyphenols, and fats can enhance the absorption and change the absorption kinetics of polyphenols. Moreover, as highlighted in the present review, not only a nutrient alone but also certain synergisms between food macronutrients have a significant effect on the bioavailability and biological activity of polyphenols.

      ‘Recently, we showed that milk protein–polyphenol complexes lead to significant changes in the plasma kinetics profile but do not affect the absorption and bioactivity of polyphenols both in rats and in human subjects( 9 , 10 )

      2014, Zhang et al – https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/interaction-of-plant-phenols-with-food-macronutrients-characterisation-and-nutritionalphysiological-consequences

      I do hope this will be the last time that Lorenz et al is selectively referenced (without qualification) as a reliable source on this subject. On the evidence it is little more than pseudo-science.

      https://nutritionfacts.org/2018/10/25/what-happens-if-you-add-milk-to-tea/#comment-544916

      1. Well at least you are relevant to topic as opposed to that other dirt bag.
        So Tom may care to entertain you. I just started with this your first rebuttal cited and found this stated…”
        “All participants of our study fasted overnight and consumed only a croissant without filling, thus limiting the influence of fat or any surrounding food matrix on the FMD response”

        WTF??? a croissant is considered to limit the influence on fat or surrounding food matrix…In what universe, may I ask? And these two are then expected to be taken seriously in their conflict?
        Comical. A croissant is always high fat likely moderate to high in salt and simple sugars…always. From the get go..the first retort..nonsense clearly.

        1. Second study cited.

          SETTING:
          The study was performed at the Unilever Research Vlaardingen in The Netherlands.
          SUBJECTS:
          Twelve healthy adult volunteers (7 females, 5 males) participated in the study. They were recruited among employees of Unilever Research Vlaardingen.”

          You are kidding right. You expect objective study and results when not only are the study group done by unilever the largest multinational food company in the world with extensive diary interests and a history of also trying to stifle the opposition to their products with lawsuits on other than dairy egg products…. to give objective honest appraisal of things????

            1. Next reference source..
              “We found that using the ABTS(+) assays, the antioxidant activity of all polyphenols was lowered by 11-27% in the presence of caseins. Using cyclic voltammetry, the overall current measured at the electrode was decreased by the presence of the protein, from 21% to 61%. The peak potentials were also shifted to higher values varying from 13 to 41 mV. However, using lipid peroxidation method, we noticed of the antioxidant activity of all the polyphenols changed (from 6% up to 75%) after the addition of alpha-casein. The results show using this method the larger gallate esters containing polyphenols epicatechingallate (ECG) and (epigallocatechingallate (EGCG) were less affected by the presence of casein than smaller polyphenols catechins (C), epicatechin (EC) and epicgallocatechine (EGC). Alpha-casein caused a small effect on the chain breaking antioxidant capacity of theaflavins as well. Therefore, casein has different effects on the overall antioxidant capacities of tea compounds depending on the methods used. We aim to understand those results with the types of protein-polyphenol interactions that take place in various settings and their effects on the antioxidant capacities of those compounds.”

              UH fool….it does not say increased it say changed. Fool it says…”were less affected by the presence of casein than smaller polyphenols catechins (C),”

              Not enhanced or increased. Increased only in relation to the other catechins…fool

              1. Ok next study cited…Sydney Moser is one of the lead researchers of Pepsi, nestle participated in this, as well as Cargill…..

                Can we find a more interested group of parties in the whole world, which already markets green tea milk added beverages???
                And not to mention this was a green tea powder not green tea used and the conclusion was there is more study needed to make definitive determination…

                Yes more than the abstract is available as this study is found in PDF form…fool.

      2. Your lengthy post makes a lot of noise and dust, Pete. However, it is really nothing more thn an attempt to obscure the central issue. As I commented in an earlier post to Barb

        “I also have seen multiple studies (usually from people associated with the industry) that show that adding cow’s milk or whatever to green tea increased catechin absorption. I am sure that it is true.
        It is however also a distraction. The point of this blog post is not about catechin absorption, it is about the effect of tea consumption on endothelial function …. and the observed rates of cardiovascular diease in people who drink tea without milk versus those who drink it with milk of some kind. That’s why I think industry studies showing polyphenol/catechin absorption is not affected by the addition of milk to tea, are simply distractions (deliberate or otherwise) from the key issue which is its effect on the hard endoints of human health – death, heart attacks, strokes, cancer etc.”

        The simple fact is that people who replace dairy (fat) with whole grains have a 28% lower risk of cardiovascular disease. Cow’s milk is an obvious source of dairy fat.
        https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2016/10/25/dairy-fat-cardiovascular-disease-risk/

  4. Looking for a milk substitute with which to make a “matcha latte,” I’ve hit on “lite” coconut milk, whose list of ingredients shows zero protein. Does this make sense? There must be a way to get the benefits without the bitterness!

    1. Soy has a very similar amino acid profile to meats and such. So I would not worry about the other milks personally as their amino profile is different, even if they do contain some protein.

      This is another case of protein being demonized because of one or two types, I am afraid.
      No study of course, many of the milks are new products, but I feel pretty certain in this.

    2. Apparently they favour sweetened soy and almond milks to make matcha lattes in the UK.
      https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/asia/matcha-japan-tour-uji-kyoto-green-tea-latte-drink-superfood-antioxidents-instagram-a7875176.html

      However, adulterating tea with such things seems like an abomination to me. Even if there is no protein, there is still a large dollop of (saturated) fat and sugar in these milks. The bitterness of tea is part of its attraction. I admit though that I sometimes add beetroot powder to cacao and coffee which makes those slightly sweeter to the taste … but I really prefer them straight.

      However, if you like sweetened beverages why not try date sugar/syrup?
      https://nutritionfacts.org/recipe/date-syrup/
      https://nutritionfacts.org/2013/05/07/is-there-a-safe-low-calorie-sweetener/

  5. I drink a lot of “teas” that aren’t derived from tea leaves. Hoping someday to see a video comparing benefits or lack of, from these liquid refreshments.

      1. Barb, after refreshing my memory I think I may have seen that video previously but had forgotten. Anyway, seeing it again I found the info I had hoped for in my post above. Thanks for pointing me to it.

    1. Stevia contains by nutritional analysis 1 gm per serving of carbohydrates and no protein, so I would not worry about that specific mentioned in this video.
      Dr Greger attests to erythritol as being the healthiest sweetner of this kind. I personally use a erythritol first stevia second, organic blend, as it seems to taste and work more like sugar. But it is marketed as organic stevia blend.
      But the first item listed on ingredient list, despite the name of the product, is the chief ingredient in it. So it is a bit of a lie, this label.

      1. I hadn’t seen the Erythritol video or blog.

        Hmmmm “Erythritol is found naturally in pears and grapes, but industrially, yeast is used to produce it. Erythritol doesn’t cause cavities, and it hasn’t been implicated in fibromyalgia, preterm birth, headaches, hypertension, brain disorders, or platelet disorders like other low-calorie sweeteners. Moreover, erythritol may actually have some antioxidant properties.”

        Curious about blood sugar spikes and gut microbiome

        My Diabetic friends use Stevia, which they say doesn’t spike their blood sugar.

  6. I have been drinking black tea every morning for years, and I use Almond milk. I will eliminate it if it’s having a negative effect on the tea, but it sure would be nice to know before I do because I really enjoy it. :)

    1. I don’t think we can demonize all proteins found in veggies and other things, because of the amino acid profile in soy which distinctly resembles that found in meats.

      Which is why soy taken in excess may cause us to stimulate IGF-1 production but the rest of the veggies beans and all do not.

    2. Ron seems to think that any studies that find adverse effects from high protein consumption are ‘demonising’ protein. It reminds me of all the saturated fat advocates who dismiss 100 years of research findings as simply ‘demonising’ saturated fat. Sorry, Ron but it does.

      However, back on point, I don’t think anybody has researched whether almond milk blocks or blunts the beneficial effects of tea drinking. Personally, I wouldn’t take the risk – but it’s an individual decision – and I prefer the taste of straight black tea anyway.

      The demonstrated benefits of tea drinking on mortality, cardiovascular health etc all appear to come from studies of peple who drank unadulterated black or green tea. Assuming that similar benefits will be seen from drinking tea with plant milks appears to be based on assumptions (faith!) rather than actual hard evidence.

      1. Ok in this video Dr Greger mentions the affect of a overconsumption of soy as a raiser of IGF-1

        https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-much-soy-is-too-much/
        This is not a solely held position several of the WFPB docs recommend the same thing and in fact one of them requests no soy at all.
        The reason it is presumed soy reacts similar to animal products in this is because of a similar amino acid profile. This is not definitive but it is a logical assumption.

        There is nothing to suggest the protein in other plant milks, at a much lower and at times negligible amount compared to soy and the different source, milks are now made of the most diverse of things from oats to flax to nuts to hemp to about everything under the sun…is going to approximate soy in effect.

        If you have study to support that…please show it. I am generally adverse to personal attacks of this sort….”Ron seems to think that any studies”
        And will of course respond in kind when irritated by it. Continue in this tact and I will be.

          1. This references Dr John McDougalls postion on soy and IGF-1.from his site..

            “Concentrated dairy (cow-milk) protein, when consumed by people, causes large and important loses of calcium contributing to osteoporosis and kidney stones. You would hope that replacement with soy protein concentrates would eliminate this health hazard. Unfortunately, recent research on people has demonstrated that the addition of 40 grams of concentrated soy protein to a diet, already low in protein (40 to 50 grams daily) and high in calcium (1100 mg daily), causes significant net losses of calcium from the body.27 Other research shows isolated soy protein is just as damaging as meat protein to the bones.28
            Another recent study showed how 40 grams of soy or cow-milk protein concentrate added to the diet significantly increases levels of a powerful cancer-promoting growth hormone, called Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 – IGF-1.29 However, soy protein was almost twice as powerful as the milk protein concentrate – doubling the levels of IGF-1 with 40 grams of soy protein isolate. This growth promoter has been strongly linked to the development of cancer of the breast, prostate, lung, and colon.30 Excess IGF-1 stimulates cell proliferation and inhibits cell death – two activities you definitely don’t want when cancer cells are involved. 30”

            I don’t hold this view but I can clearly see why soy protein may have a effect that is not that of other plant food protein.And may in fact under certain circumstances replicate that of animal products…

        1. Gee, I don’t doubt it Ron. You probably will anyway whatever I or anybody else writes. You have an obvious and very large bee in your bonnet about this topic. Still, it provides some company for the other large bee in your bonnet – the marijuana one.

          You go for it Ron.

          1. I have provided three source references for my position from our side… Dr Greger, Dr McDougall, and NIH study which supports their position…so refute it.

            Or personalize the argument….your choice.

            1. Just looking through the coffee and milk video, and came across this..
              “Steven Litrov (Global Volunteer Director) says:
              October 9th, 2018 at 10:33 am
              Dr. Greger mentioned in the Doctor’s Note: “Almond, rice, and coconut-based milks have so little protein that I doubt there’d be a blocking effect, but they’ve never been tested directly to my knowledge.”

              Which seems to reinforce my recommendation with variance of cause. And directly contradicts your statement…”Assuming that similar benefits will be seen from drinking tea with plant milks appears to be based on assumptions (faith!) rather than actual hard evidence.”

              Faith no..lack of protein is his basis in that video. I express other probable cause for lack of worry.

              1. Ron

                That statement you quoted included the words “but they’ve never been tested directly to my knowledge.” As I wrote, it is therefore an assumption that they do not have a similar effect. It may be a correct assumption but it is an assumption nonetheless.

            2. Ron

              It is hardly personalising the argument to point out that you constantly refer to people ‘demonising’ protein, whenever you refer to videos or studies that identify adverse effects from (high) protein consumption. It is a simple statement of fact

              I’m pretty sure that Greger, McDougall and that NIH study don’t go around talking about people ‘demonising’ protein either.

              1. Dr Gregers position is not Dr McDougall’s position on this. In fact Dr Gregers is a more nuanced one. McDougall overtly demonizes it.
                You want to proport McDougalls positions…sure no problem.
                Greger is actually quite moderate on a number of things. But don’t take objection when I verse opposition using the man himself, Dr Greger on his own site to support in valid reference.

                And once again you are personalizing this argument and provide no substance or counter.

                1. Dr Greger does not make statements nor conclusion nor give advice on the basis of faith.
                  In this specific he clearly states protein content as basis. I vary with that but the end is the same..other plant milks likely do not suffer the same result.

                  1. I was after all answering a question in good faith posed by Sean…and you saw fit to make comment on all these claimed personal issues I exemplify. Which is interesting but bears little resemblance to Seans quary nor provides any answer to Seans quary.

                2. Ron You are using the word ‘demonising’ every time somebody refers to studies or views about protein that you don’t like. Look at your depiction of McDougall’s views.

                  If anyone is personalising this, it is you. Can’tr you just accept that people sincerely hold different views to yours, without using loaded terms like ‘demonising’ to describe their analyses?

                  1. Demonization is in this context the portrayal of a thing as threatening, in a unwarranted manner .
                    Yes this notion protein is posing hazard, all types, due to the particular characteristics of certain types of protein, soy and animal derivative, is unwarranted..
                    Or you can pose study showing they are equal… other plant protein source and animal and soy….. can you?
                    No you cannot.

                    My contention is that plant based milks such as almond and others, excepting soy milk pose likely no tendency to bind the positive properties of green teas as cows milk, as their protein make up, amino acid profiles differ in a significant manner, soy and milk being most alike in such of any plant and animal product. Can you prove they do…no you cannot.

                    But you are apparently making the overreach of claim we simply cannot ever pose a theory on this as to affirmation or denial…..which we can by amino acid profiles study. Hence you are portraying other forms of protein as a threat to human health when it is not and thus are demonizing protein in general putting to wide a blanket on this thing covered.
                    And you are not answering Seans question in any manner and in fact adding nothing of substance contrary to my statement by study or verifiable valid source to the issue he has raised.

                    I claim in counter you are obsessed with the notion that protein is bad in the same manner you are obsessed with the notion you mentioned…. pot is bad.
                    Without solid footing in science. In both you are exhibiting internal bias of a self evolved nature.

                    .

                    1. I to add don’t like or dislike protein. It is a thing of functional necessity. I worked out lifting weights 1.5 hours today. It is a essential element necessary for muscle repair and growth. I neither like it or dislike it I need it to function properly.

                      You having perhaps not the same necessity for consumption as me does not infer others have not this necessity

                      Peoples that are weak out of shape and totally unable to do things physically with muscles that simply cannot perform as I and others may, are often prone to make claims on the lack of necessity for protein consumption. They do not need it and often they want us who have that need, to be like them so they will not appear functionally inferior.

                      But they are,and we do need it. So they who are weak, tend to demonize the lack of necessity for strength and revel in their weakness. Which is not my concern as they are not me. Statements such as protein..why do you need that abound. But it is my concern protein is not demonized for this aim as others who perhaps have not studied this, may be led astray, consume less and be less able to repair muscle rebuild and perform things of effort.

                      Very many of us vegans have that as a personal requirement …to perform things of effort. I have no problem with others being weak it is not my concern. That they attempt to spread their weakness to those of us who are strong is a bit my concern.
                      I suspect you may be one but can not say certainly as I don’t know you personally. It would explain your very large problem with those who take position against the demonization of protein.In other manner I just cannot explain it…so perhaps explain it. I will listen.

                    2. No personal offense intended, but in your picture, assuming that is you..you appear very weak and old. Nothing wrong with either, but as explained it would provide a cause for this great objection you hold to protein consumption.

                      So are you old and weak…again no personal offense intended.

                    3. Ron purred, “No personal offense intended, but in your picture, assuming that is you..you appear very weak and old. ”
                      – – – – – – –

                      Hey, maybe I too could get away with telling somebody, “No personal offense intended, but you are one ugly, fat, wrinkled, stinky-breathed, cross-eyed, excuse for a human being. Oh, but no personal offense intended!”

                      Fumbles, even though your skin looks fine to me, perhaps you should dye your hair and take another mugshot….this time with a wide, happy grin on your face. Unless, of course, you have miserable looking teeth. :-)

                    4. As I have already demonstrated cows milk does not diminish the bioavailability of tea polyphenols once the tea is digested. There is a reasonable chance the same applies to plant-based proteins, that is, given some at least also appear to bind to tea polyphenols in the pre-consumption phase. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5188469/ Seems to me this study summarises it best: ‘We conclude that intake of polyphenols incorporated in protein-rich drinks does not have a major impact on the bioavailability of a range of different polyphenols and phenolic metabolites’.

                    5. OK…now that’s the way to do it. A real relevant study with not just the abstract, on point and directly to the issue…
                      Thanks Pete..now we can look at it and discuss.

                      The point of question the authors mention is concentrations which they talk about as the explaination for the deviation in study results…

                      “This may be a plausible explanation for the controversy among studies, although so far the phenolic bioavailability and metabolism of products with low vs. high levels of polyphenols have not been tested head-to-head. Our more precise conclusion may thus be that bioavailability and metabolism of wine and grape polyphenols is not importantly affected by milk or soy proteins when consumed in relatively high dose. The definition of a (sufficiently) high dose requires more research.”

                      So yes that would explain it quite adequately actually.
                      Thanks for providing that.
                      On this with Sean………. the concentrations of protein in any case in the fake milks are so low likely they do not hinder anything. As we retain proteins for use anyway, and do not metabolize them immediately, retaining them as stores we devolve throughout the day, it makes little sense body wise we are set up to disallow positive results from very many food because some other is consumed at the same time.

                      In any event this was in response to Sean, and I firmly think he has not to worry. Even if it was milk itself consumed, likely concentration load would overcome any deficit present if one consumed teas in other than very small amounts.

                      So to a extend with milk and soy it would depend seemingly on how much teas one consumed to make this a practical reality.
                      The other plant milks despite Tom’s wild prostrations to the inverse, there remains not a single study or reasonably logical conclusion from known physical properties showing a negative in this fashion. He is simply obsessed(possibly) that we consume no protein and be seemingly looking weak and old.

                    6. To add…… this really displays how this thing works in discussion. WE all are little served with having 100 study results put up, and then the other side doing the same to the inverse. And of course with so many studies put up some are going to be bad studies with little relevance. Leading us to think nothing has substance and no truth can be found, it is just a case of hundreds of opposing studies and which side are you on.

                      This showed a very important thing,the concentration load. Now if we wanted to, we could explore if the concentration load has been expounded upon in study, likely not, but that would provide direction to result a findable known thing. And it is important as well that we attempt to show actual studies as that is often critical in this is was. The findings are nuanced not present in abstract completely.

                      We know greatly about the science the study and this and that. You guys Tom Pete whoever, are far superior to me in any regard. But you know not the slightest on debate, and that I know from extensive political experience.

                      Which is why, really, we are getting no where in this thing. Reminding me distinctly of climate change back in the day. A lot known of the science but little known of how to portray and debate the science…so we failed in that. IN this we may not. Nutrition is important. Reasonable approach to it is critical.

                    7. Ron

                      You are entirely missing the point.

                      My comment was not about whether your beliefs about protein are correct or not. It was about your habit of terming studies and people that refer to any possible adverse effects from protein as ‘demonising protein’ If you go up this thead you will find that you depicted studies like those showing that milk and soy proteins impair the beneficial effects of tea consumption as ‘demonising protein’.

                      it is also a factual observation. It is not personalising things. Personalising a debate is for example when you attack the character, and engage in savage name calling, of eg Pete and Greg. I know you attempted to justify that by saying you were just defending Dr Greger. However, I don’t recall either Greg or Pete making gratuitously offensive comments about Dr Greger’s physical appearance. I can recall a couple of occasions when you have done so though. Now that is personalising things.

                      No offence Ron but having read your posts for quite some time, I have noted that your English is occasionally quite peculiar, you sometimes miss the point and you seem to have manic phases where you bang out an unbroken succession of a half dozen or more l-o-n-g, rambling posts. So I have to ask, no offence intended, do you have any cognitive or mental health problems that you are aware of?

                      People who have cognitive and mental health problems are often prone to wild outbursts, verbal aggression, irrational statements andthe may not grasp the issues when interacting with others. In dementia for example

                      “Both depression and elated mood are commonly associated with irritability, a pervasive feeling of unease in response to a sense of threat with enhanced readiness to hostile attitudes or actions ………. Affective (or mood) lability is characterized by rapid emotional shifts, within seconds or minutes.”
                      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3345875/

                    8. OMG, that was one touche’, Fumbles! :-)

                      No offense intended, ron, but I’ve noticed that you do not use the word “an” in front of a, e, i, o, u and sometimes y words. As school kids, most of us have learned that this is correct grammar. Or maybe you’re just being ornery?

                      No offense intended, of course; just an observation. :-)

                    9. Well Tom, going through your stuff it seems obvious to me when backed in a corner you invariably throw out the mental health jog.
                      Are you by training a psychologist psychiatrist or some other qualification in that…think not.
                      But that about says it..with no qualification able and free to make some claims based upon personal bias.Never ever admitting fault or retraction or error…ever, just not in your make up. So when pressed as I did here….strikes out like a child…ah, the mental health thing…..None of my business you are what you are.

                      Me personally, I have not had to work for money for about 20 years, and my only source of that thing auxiliary to my asset base and incomes is the hobby of trading stocks commodities and such.
                      Which I no longer much engage, as honestly it bores me, and I really have no need for any additional money. What I gained through that I invariably gave away.
                      So my intellect in this world has served me well, and largely has not changed a whit. As to dementia I guess all of us worry as we age of that…me….I for some unknown reason can remember lines of numbers in recollection much more than in my youth. Why that is so…really I don’t know.
                      But needless to say I don’t worry to much of that.
                      Oh I have a temper no doubt about it. But mental illness is a thing of grade or degree. We all have the aspects of illness in personality to varying degrees. Mental illness as diagnosis is the ability to function and be functionally able. Such a thing is not determined by internet conversation or discussion….that notion is absurd. Unless as happens occasionally one admits deficit.

  7. Full-Fat Milk Could Cut Risk of Stroke, Heart Attack, Study Says- https://www.newsweek.com/full-fat-milk-could-cut-risk-stroke-heart-attack-study-says-1025069

    Drink MILK if you don’t want a cardiac arrest – cetusnews- http://www.cetusnews.com/life/Drink-MILK-if-you-don-t-want-a-cardiac-arrest.S1QQRGzFnb.html

    Higher intake of total dairy (including full fat) was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular disease and death from ALL causes – https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31812-9/fulltext?_ke=eyJrbF9lbWFpbCI6ICJncmF5Z0BibGFja2hhd2ttZ210LmNvbSIsICJrbF9jb21wYW55X2lkIjogIm15NzV5NiJ9

    Consuming milk at breakfast lowers blood glucose throughout the day: Effects of protein composition and concentration – ScienceDaily

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180820085243.htm

    Milk does a body good: Study –
    https://abcnews.go.com/Health/milk-body-good-study/story?id=57755524

    Two New Studies Make the Case for Feeding Kids Cow’s Milk and Eggs –
    https://www.health.com/nutrition/milk-eggs-help-kids-grow

    1. Oh are we not lucky….another post on anything remotely to do with milk and the POS shows up with his hundred studies sponsored by various dairy council surrogates …..

      What don’t you take your c and shove it up your a…POS….

      1. Here’s a clue..post your website and say for those who think dairy is bad come visit me here…and then post it…….
        Instead of bothering us with you S*&^ every time dairy is even mentioned in a blog title POS.
        If you had any brains which you do not that is the better way to do your F(*&ed up thing.

              1. Here from the last video posts… but really it happens almost on all of them, with some slight variance…
                Reality bites says:
                October 24th, 2018 at 12:09 pm
                It also would be helpful if people asked relevant questions to the article instead of wanting free off topic advice”

                It would be really helpful if Mr Dairy council, would stop bothering us with his propaganda and leave us alone….if he actually asked a honest question or two it may be reasonably answered. Just posting a boatload of c and then expecting us all to willingly play along is becoming a bit to much.

                So RB could serve some helpful purpose if he stated a thing like that by my read on it.

                1. AHso…..you meant Reality Bites — the constipated one who shows up just to complain.

                  I thought you were on about a sort of Plan A vs. Plan B thing. Now it makes sense.

                2. I had the impression from RB’s earlier posts that (s)he may actually have some sympathy for low carb and ‘eggs/dairy are health foods’ dietary beliefs.

      2. Ron,

        Some of the people who come here and post things like that will be people who are confused by the studies or believe those sources and are arguing out of that belief system. Not all of them will be industry shills.

        We should be practiced at debating them based on the information at hand.

        1. Deb..this guy did not initiate a discussion or debate..he listed six studies contrary to Dr Gregers position and then ran for the hills…..

          You responded..nothing wrong with that but that is not how people initiate debate. It is trolling.
          A honest person lists a point of debate or two and then stays around to debate it or consider it….they do not throw six things on a wall to see what sticks and what sort of response they get….five hours later and we have…zero.

          He did not even respond to my stuff..it is clearly trollingBS disruption.
          This place was disrupted by the same sort of thing by one guy for about a year. Till finally they banned him, but it took a year. Everyone knows him and the fact of that.
          We hazard such if we entertain these guys.

          Yes we must discriminate between trolls and honest questions or the poseing of contrary view.

    2. Greg

      The first study was not a measure of whether people drank milk. It was a measure of which fatty acids they have, which they said, could have come from dairy.

      The second study is not a measure of whether people drank milk either. It was about Calcium. “They found people with the lowest blood calcium levels are twice as likely to have their heart suddenly stop working.”

      1. The third study had a link which said: “Two recent Swedish studies indicate both negative and positive associations with total mortality when comparing key dairy products.” which that article is ignoring and they didn’t put who funded the positive results study in the article. They said that the information is available if you go to the study.

        1. The fourth one is saying that adding a protein to a meal decreases blood sugar, but we have things like nuts, which do the same thing and getting rid of the saturated fats and getting off of insulin is even better.

          The fifth one is an interesting study, but they included yogurt in with the other sources of dairy and I believe that Dr. Greger said that there may be some benefit to yogurt.

          1. The last one, the kids are taller if they drink something with cow’s growth hormone is not surprising.

            If they are short, then, they might need to up their intake of soy, which also can increase the IGF-1

            1. Out of all of those studies, only the blood glucose and being taller are linked directly to milk and with the blood sugar studies.

              In the blood glucose study, they increased the whey protein in the milk to get the best result.

              Whey protein.

              Not Casein.

                1. Thanks Claudio!

                  I know that the internet is so confusing for many people and the fact that industry studies often have the opposite results from non-industry studies does make it confusing.

                  1. Greg,

                    If I start building my logic from your last study, the thing about growth hormone is that it is helpful for children to grow, but after that it is highly linked to causing Cancer to grow. Dr Greger has a good series on that. Little people don’t get Cancer. Elderly people once they reach a very advanced age when they have stopped producing growth hormones stop getting Cancer.

                    Moving to Diabetes and blood glucose, milk and higher protein milk do drop blood glucose, but so does eating vegetables before the rest of your meal or adding nuts to your meal. Better still would be to not get Diabetes in the first place. Dairy is linked to Type 1 Diabetes and saturated fat is linked to Type 2 Diabetes. Getting rid of saturated fats and people have their pancreas heal and get off insulin and then they don’t have blood glucose problems.

                    Going up to the mortality studies, Dr Greger’s audio podcast this week is on the Mediterranean Diet and it is a lot better than the Standard American Diet, but when they tested it against Whole Food Plant Based, it wasn’t as good. People who changed from Mediterranean and got rid of things like dairy improved their heart attack rates considerably.

                    Also, for that section, we are highly skeptical of industry studies if non-industry studies give the opposite results.

                    For the Calcium section, you can get Calcium from beans and seeds and other foods. Dr Gregers Daily Dozen gives you lots of Calcium.

                    I am not going to comment on the fatty acid study, except that they couldn’t definitively say where the fatty acids came from, and that makes it harder to evaluate.

                    1. The might cause Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes, but then very nicely might lower the blood sugar spike from your oatmeal is Gambler’s logic.

                    2. The Casino’s have really good hotel deals for people who lose all their money. I know a few people who used the jacuzzi tub and free meal as a way to comfort their spouses who were worried about losing their houses.

                    3. Also related to them boasting of causing people to grow taller:

                      It is a benefit for putting the Angel on the top of a Christmas tree or for playing basketball, but the longevity studies for tall people don’t support their healthier theory.

                      Google height and longevity.

                    4. Deb… 19… said:
                      If I start building my logic from your last study, the thing about growth hormone is that it is helpful for children to grow, but after that it is highly linked to causing Cancer to grow. Dr Greger has a good series on that. Little people don’t get Cancer. Elderly people once they reach a very advanced age when they have stopped producing growth hormones stop getting Cancer.
                      ———————————————————————-
                      This is my understanding as well, speaking in a general sense. Good info Deb.

                    5. Oh, and the culprit in milk (and other foods) is IGF-1… Insulin-like Growth Factor – 1.

                      But small amounts may not be a problem… don’t know that, just sayin’.

                    6. Yes the thing about tall people being more likely to get cancer was discussed in the media only a day or two.

                      They hypothesise that tall people have more cells and so statistically it is more likely that that one or more of tho cells will become cancerous. The same hypothesis would explain why men are more likely to get cancer than women and why obesity appears to be a risk factor for cancer.
                      https://medibulletin.com/tall-people-are-more-prone-to-cancer-thats-why-men-have-it-more/

            2. The cow’s growth hormone brought about my granddaughter’s too early menstrual cycle and she had breasts as well all at age nine. Poor child.

              1. Don’t have the information in front of me but there is a school of thought that early puberty can be passed down genetically from parents, or maybe even further back in lineage. IIRC, smoking may have been the cause, but not sure of that.

    3. Greg

      These studies appear largely observational, most recently and most loudly the PURE study. This study was led by a team based at McMaster University which has long-standing funding links with the Canadian dairy industry. Dairy foods of course are high in saturated fat and sodium. Quite coincidentally I am sure, that team has produced papers based on the PURE study which attempt to imply that saturated fat, sodium and dairy foods in general are (causally).associated with good health and lower mortality.

      However, PURE was an international study. People in wealthy Western countries with access to clean water, good public health amd medical systems, genuine pharmaceutical drugs and a wide range of food stuffs, enjoy better health and live longer that people in poor countries without those advantages. Naturally, wealthy Westerners will also eat more fat, sodium and dairy foods than poor people in poor countries who live on a limited range of low quality carbohydrate foodstuffs often cooked using cheap hydrogennated oils (ie trans fats)).

      Failing to adjust for such confounding factors and then claiming that the study shows that eating more dairy, saturated fat and sodium than current science based guidelines recommend, is healthy and reduces mortality might kindly be called misleading.

      Why do you consistenly fall for this deceptive industry nonsense Greg? They are playing you (and the rest of us) for suckers. Dairy probably is healthier than SAD junk foods, burgers, white bread, bacon, doughnuts etc. which is why studies that don’t properly take account of replacemment nutrients can be highly misleading. Those which do however don’t give a clean bill of health to dairy

      “What did predict risk of cardiovascular disease was “fat swapping.” When dairy fat was replaced with the same number of calories from vegetable fat or polyunsaturated fat, the risk of cardiovascular disease dropped by 10% and 24%, respectively. Furthermore, replacing the same number of calories from dairy fat with healthful carbohydrates from whole grains was associated with a 28% lower risk of cardiovascular disease.”
      https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2016/10/25/dairy-fat-cardiovascular-disease-risk/

      “Using dietary information from 63,442 women participating in the Nurses’ Health Study and 29,942 men from Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, the researchers used statistical modeling to estimate the effects of substituting harmful dietary components such as saturated fats, refined carbohydrates, or trans fats with an equal number of calories from MUFAs of plant or animal sources (MUFA-Ps and MUFA-As).

      The researchers found that heart disease risk was significantly lower when saturated fats, refined carbohydrates, or trans fats were replaced by MUFA-Ps, but not by MUFA-As.”

  8. I am really interested to see Dr Greger do some videos on cooking utensils and their coatings…. Teflon vs stainless vs ceramic, etc…

  9. Therefore one could assume that milk might also block some of the effects of coffee !?
    Dr Greger, are there any studies about milk/cream blocking the benefits of coffee?

    1. There is little if any information on the health effects of decaffeinated tea drinking so I suspect the answer is that we don’t know.

  10. Those inclined to follow Dr Gs advice on this subject would be wise to read the following: In response to criticism of their methodology, the quoted author (Lorenz et al) concede their study was next to useless:

    ‘As we have shown in Table 2 of our paper, tea catechins become complexed as soon as milk is added to tea. Whether these complexes are broken down after digestion of the caseins and whether the catechins are subsequently released and absorbed later on represent interesting questions’.

    ‘We are also aware of the study by van het Hof et al.,6 who did not observe a difference in plasma catechin concentrations after consumption of black tea with or without milk. This objection needs to be further investigated’.

    ‘A plausible explanation of the fact that we observed an impairment of FMD response after addition of milk to tea may be that the catechins, owing to the longer retention period in the digestive tract, could have been modified and thus rendered physiologically inactive. The suggestion by the authors to measure the vasodilatory response at later time points is an important issue that should be addressed in future studies’.

    https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/28/10/1266/2887455.

    In other words, the author’s excluded the possibility that the complexes formed between milk proteins and tea flavanols are broken down during digestion. Other studies demonstrate that this is precisely what occurs Moreover, an earlier study by van Hof et al found milk had no effect on plasma catechin concentrations:

    ‘Addition of milk to black tea (100 ml in 600 ml) did not significantly affect the blood catechin levels (areas under the curves (mean (CVM) of 0.53 h. micromol/l (11%) vs 0.60 h. micromol/l (9%) for black tea and black tea with milk respectively’.

    ‘Conclusion: Catechins from green tea and black tea are rapidly absorbed and milk does not impair the bioavailability of tea catechins’.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9630386

    Other shortcomings with the Lorenz study include the following:

    1. The researchers used skimmed milk. Given interactions between milk fats and proteins, this is hardly a reliable indicator of the effects of full or low fat milk on tea catechins. (fats can enhance the absorption and change the absorption kinetics of polyphenols – 2014, Zhang et al – https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/interaction-of-plant-phenols-with-food-macronutrients-characterisation-and-nutritionalphysiological-consequences

    2. The improvement in FMD with black tea consumption (without milk) is only 3.5%, which is minimal in any event. Similar increases in FMD follow consumption of a high-flavanol cocoa drink, oral ingestion of epicatechin, consumption of dark chocolate, and drinking of white and red wine.

    3. Tea flavan-3-ols include not only catechin, but also epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin, epigallocatechin gallate, proanthocyanidins, theaflavins and thearubigins. The bioavailability of most if not all of these flavanols are IMPROVED with the addition of milk to black tea.

    4. Not all polyphenols are complexed with milk proteins (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24001682), and the antioxidant activity of all polyphenols INCREASES after the addition of alpha-casein (from 6% to 75%) (Zhang et al, 2014)

    5. There are many complex macronutrient synergies occurring between tea and other nutrients in the diet. For example, carbohydrates enhance the absorption and extend the time needed to reach a maximal plasma concentration of polyphenols (Zhang et al)

    6. Research (Xie et al, Oct 2013, Bourassa et al, 2013, Moser et al, December 2014) demonstrate that when adding milk to tea (i.e., pre-consumption) milk minerals immediately increase tea flavanol bioaccessibility, milk protein (casein) reduce tea flavanol bioaccessibility – but the latter is completely reversed during human digestion (post consumption). Thus, the addition of milk increases (not decreases) the net bioavailability of tea polyphenols.

    The following is the effect of adding milk to tea and consuming (subject to other nutritional synergies). By complexing, milk protein initially DECREASES the bioaccessability of flavan-3-ols. However, counteracting this:

    1. Milk minerals INCREASE flavanol bioaccesability – even prior to digestion

    2. Post-consumption digestion breaks down these complexes, making polyphenols fully bioavailable.

    ‘Milk protein, most notably S-CSN, significantly decreased (p < 0.05) bioaccessibility of flavan-3-ols relative to JK buffer controls (10 relative to 32%). Interestingly, the presence of milk minerals significantly INCREASED (p < 0.05) flavan-3-ol bioaccessibility compared to that of controls (32 relative to 18%). These data combined with SDS-PAGE and fluorometric analyses suggest that both milk proteins and minerals may alter flavan-3-ol bioaccessibility, but normal GI digestion appears to minimize the impact of specific protein interactions’.

    Moser et al, 2014: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996914006188

    ‘To summarize, these data suggest that milk addition may increase catechin bioavailability by enhancing their transepithelial absorption and uptake from green tea extract’.

    Xie et al, 2013: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996912003079

    ‘using lipid peroxidation method, we noticed of the antioxidant activity of all the polyphenols changed (from 6% up to 75%) after the addition of alpha-casein. The results show using this method the larger gallate esters containing polyphenols epicatechingallate (ECG) and (epigallocatechingallate (EGCG) were less affected by the presence of casein than smaller polyphenols catechins (C), epicatechin (EC) and epicgallocatechine (EGC).

    Bourassa et al, 2013: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24001682

    ‘when plant phenols are consumed along with food macronutrients, the bioavailability and bioactivity of polyphenols can be significantly affected. The protein–polyphenol complexes can significantly change the plasma kinetics profile but do not affect the absorption of polyphenols. Carbohydrates can enhance the absorption and extend the time needed to reach a maximal plasma concentration of polyphenols, and fats can enhance the absorption and change the absorption kinetics of polyphenols. Moreover, as highlighted in the present review, not only a nutrient alone but also certain synergisms between food macronutrients have a significant effect on the bioavailability and biological activity of polyphenols.

    ‘Recently, we showed that milk protein–polyphenol complexes lead to significant changes in the plasma kinetics profile but do not affect the absorption and bioactivity of polyphenols both in rats and in human subjects( 9 , 10 )

    2014, Zhang et al – https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/interaction-of-plant-phenols-with-food-macronutrients-characterisation-and-nutritionalphysiological-consequences

    I do hope this will be the last time that Lorenz et al is selectively referenced (without qualification) as a reliable source on this subject. On the evidence it is little more than pseudo-science.

    1. Lots to read. Thanks for your participation.

      This will have to wait until I am at my computer next.

      Okay, can you argue against the link between Type 1 Diabetes and dairy?

      1. Peter,

        Your contribution is useful to this community. Even probably to Dr Greger himself who has to go out and debate people on topics like this and it helps to have someone posting the dissenting opinions.

        I do wonder what you do with topics like Type 1 Diabetes and Growth hormone from always kept pregnant cows and topics like Saturated Fat.

        I appreciate the study versus study debate style, but I would also like your more comprehensive position. Are you not worried about any of it? Or do you have a “in moderation” perspective?

        1. I would not mind if the tea and milk methodology was wrong. It was replicated with soy milk and some of us would be happy if my soy milk placebo effect turned out to be a good one.

        2. Ok let me explain it for you a bit Deb, I am a bit familiar with this guy….he mentions above he already states he received a ban…wonder why??
          Well he did not get a hit on his stuff above a response…so he just copies is down here so he may. So we have twice the same exact stuff.
          Which does what…disrupts the site to his benefit I suppose, but to our detriment.
          And I actually did bother to look up his stuff and it is in general if not misinterpreted, total nonsense with obvious obvious conflict of influence(image includeing a pepsi researcher as a health study party ) and often no study found in his links….

          So feel free have a go at it…a waste of time as he will never admit a thing nor change a thing. As a aside read the statistics carefully…it is the same manipulation of data I discussed with you on another thread in another matter.
          Have a go..I wasted my time so you can as well and I will not feel alone in that…;)
          Just don’t expect result in this. Imagine a pepsi researcher as a major participant in research study with nestle and cargil involved and it is expected to be nonbiased…. he has the b(*&s to cite that as valid study…I simply cannot believe this

          1. Here Deb this is just one quote from November 2017…in response to a debate with s milk with autism I think..

            “6. Beast milk is essential for infants. Thereafter, cows milk is of enormous nutritional benefit to the majority of humans that consume it. In many instances, life-saving. For a very small minority it may be harmful.
            Unfortunately, we mostly hear only the latter from Dr Greger.
            7. Plant-based milks may be delicious, but are simply junk food in comparison to cows milk. Substituting them for cows milk in young children is a very unwise, sometimes fatal practice.
            8. Dr Greger has the best presented nutritional website on the web. It is simply brilliant. I agree with most of his views on plant-based diets.
            However, I believe he is just plain wrong when it comes to dairy. He tends to cherry pick the small number of negatives, and repeatedly ignores the large number of positives. That is, he has an intentionally vegan/vegetarian bias. Which is perfectly OK except it skews the data.”

            And on and on and on and on…..Quary milk and generally his stuff shows up.It is not for lack of trying….he never changes a position. He is cordial but it is to distract and for no effect of discussion…ever.

        3. Deb, when I commenced studying dairy research over a decade ago I fully expected to find it would be harmful. I was very surprised that the bulk of the evidence suggested otherwise. I think ‘all things in moderation’, including dairy.

          I do worry about the use of antibiotics and growth hormone by large, industrialised dairy farms. I would not drink their milk. I prefer organic milk from grass fed cows. Fortunately, from where I hail milk is from family farms and year-round pastures. My next door neighbours (a farm owned by a very large Chinese dairy co shipping fresh milk into China) attempted to build a very large industrialised dairy, only to be thankfully rejected by the local community and council.

          My principal objection is the merging of ‘beliefs’ with ‘scientific facts’.
          That is, where the facts must support a particular premise. If so, they are promoted. If not, they are ignored. This is closer to religion than science. On balance, the world would be a better place without the former, as John Lennon advised a long time ago.

          1. Pete

            A bit of self-awareness might be in order here.

            Have you ever considered that your own lifelong love affair with the dairy industry has become a religion for you and that you happily ignore all contrary evidence to seize upon weird and wonderful reasons why dairy is good for you? And call it science.

            Look at the topic here. You basically ignore or dismiss the Lorenz study’s findings of impaired FMD to concentrate on criticising the possible mechanism of action suggested by the Lorenz team. And the long term mortality and cradiovasculat effects observed in populations drinking tea plain vs in populations drinking tea with milk. Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room. No wonder you want to ban all future reference to the Lorenz study

            To quote your words back at you “This is closer to religion than science. On balance, the world would be a better place without the former, as John Lennon advised a long time ago.”

        4. Good on you Deb… just because information may be contrary to what one has heard before doesn’t mean it is to be feared and thus, burned at the stake. After all, some (if not all) of those Salem Witches that were burned were innocent after all. ‘-)

      2. Thanks Deb.,

        *Formula*

        After breastfeeding for at least two months, half of the infants were given the study formula containing regular cow’s milk proteins, while the other half received “extensively hydrolyzed casein” formula with cow’s milk proteins split into small peptides.

        Both groups avoided cow’s milk proteins from all other food sources. The trial lasted until the youngest subject turned 10-years-old.

        The results show that in this large international randomized trial, weaning to an extensively hydrolyzed casein formula during infancy did not result in a reduction in the incidence of type 1 diabetes compared to regular intact cow’s-milk-based formula after about 11.5 years of follow up.

        The study’s researchers added that there is no evidence to revise the current dietary recommendations for infants at high risk for type 1 diabetes.

        “After more than 15 years of effort, this study puts to rest the controversy regarding the potential role of cow’s milk formula in the development of type 1 diabetes,”

        “This once more shows us that there is no easy way to prevent type 1 diabetes.”

        Dr Dorothy Becker, chief US collaborator, Children’s Hospital, Pittsburgh.

        *TRIGR Conclusions and Relevance: *

        Among infants at risk for type 1 diabetes, weaning to a hydrolyzed formula compared with a conventional formula did not reduce the cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes after median follow-up for 11.5 years. These findings do not support a need to revise the dietary recommendations for infants at risk for type 1 diabetes.
        Source: JAMA

        “Effect of Hydrolyzed Infant Formula vs Conventional Formula on Risk of Type 1 Diabetes: The TRIGR Randomized Clinical Trial”

        doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19826

        Authors: Knip, Mikael, et al

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29297078

        In terms of fresh milk, Johnes disease/paratuberculosis in cattle has been implicated in type I diabetes. At least the link has not been disproven.
        The incidence of type 1 diabetes is low (in Australia, 1 in 720 children). Those who are overly concerned may consider UHT milk, which should entirely eliminate any possible risk.

        Other studies implicate excessive sterility:

        “The findings of these large pooled and meta-analyses add additional evidence to the hypothesis that regular contact with animals in early childhood is inversely associated with childhood ALL occurrence which is consistent with (Professor) Greaves’ delayed infection hypothesis.” More specifically, they stated that contact with livestock in the first year of life was inversely associated with ALL and that inverse associations were also observed for contact with dogs and cats in the first year of life.

        In support of his theory, Greaves points out that ALL is increasing globally at the rate of about 1% a year–and that increase is almost exclusively in affluent populations. ALL rates are low or non-existent in the poorest countries where exposure to dirt is the norm while growing up and where families have lots of children and cross-infection is common. For Greaves, the answer is obvious: “Infectious disease tracks with poverty…The problem is not infection. The problem is lack of infection.” In other words, the more infectious disease a child is exposed to early in life, the less likely they are to get childhood cancer. As a side note, Greaves points out that similar trends can be seen in children with type 1 diabetes, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, multiple sclerosis and allergies.

        https://jonbarron.org/cancer-alternative-cancer-therapies/does-exposure-germs-prevent-cancer

        1. I found 2 studies where Type 1 Diabetes was linked with cows milk consumption in children who were genetically susceptible on Dr Barnard’s site.

          2001 Finnish study was one.

          One was an American study where there was a 30% decrease in Type 1 Diabetes when children weren’t exposed to cows milk for the first three months of their lives.

          Yes, it didn’t work for all of the children but a 30% decrease is a 30% decrease.

          I have read all of the theories and know that it is so complicated that they don’t know yet and that is what they said.

          1. Okay, I just watched Dr McDougalls video on Autoimmune and he touched on cows milk and Type 1 Diabetes in particular.

            Leaky gut would be when cows milk would cause it because the protein in cows milk causes an antibody to be made, which has the exact same 17 amino acid sequence as the beta cells in the pancreas – so those cells get attacked with the milk proteins.

            That would only be the cases where there was leaky gut but turning it around if you have leaky gut, the proteins you eat are going to leak through the gut and some of them match the beta cells in the pancreas fairly exactly and the antibodies don’t differentiate.

            There are likely also viruses and other things which are causal – functional things was one theory, but genetically predisposed kids and people with leaky gut could get it that way.

            So it is something with mixed studies but the people with autoimmune shouldn’t be eating animal proteins or having saturated fats at sll because Dr Swank put 95% of the people with MS in remission by removing saturated fats.

          2. Your study started formula after 2 months. The one with a 30% decrease was avoiding it for first 3 months.

            I wonder that they did the study with Breast feeding women after2 months versus all 3 months

            1. I would have to look between the studies at sample size, but your study having the children Breast fed for 2 months doesn’t show me that the other study got it wrong.

              1. I am watching the World Series and am not at my computer so I can’t post links, but my question will be whether Diabetes type 1 is sometimes autoimmune.

                I am going to look up dairy and MS and things like that.

                Yes, this is going to take me a while.

                Do the kids generally get Type 1 by age 11. I wouldn’t think the leaky gut type would come by then

                1. Well, yes, it can be autoimmune, so if people are susceptible shouldn’t drink it.

                  The cool thing for Type1 Diabetics was that newly diagnosed people need new blood vessels – angiogenesis. If they get that the stem cells could work, becsuse the blood vessels got destroyed with the Pancreas is why new Beta cells don’t grow from the stem cells or that is what I got out of it.

                  Gonna look up angiogenesis and diet and gonna look at the gadgets for if any increase angiogenesis. Seems like that was part of my stroke research.

                    1. Went to the ICES site and there is an on-going study with it and Type 1 Diabetes in mice, so maybe my logic isn’t way off.

                    2. Well, I started looking up the other autoimmune diseases and they have studies that milk makes them worse. I am not sure I got all of them, but MS would be one which had the best studies.

                      People with leaky gut and autoimmune should not have dairy.

                      Also I started seeing a discussion of a link with milk and schizophrenia.

                    3. “Previous studies have shown that dietary fats are associated with adverse outcome in schizophrenia [5, 6, 7]. However, diet is much more complex than this and dietary intake of different food stuff is highly intercorrelated. For example, people who eat a lot of saturated fat will generally also eat a lot of sugar [8]. It was also shown that meat, dairy products, and saturated fat intake were associated with poor outcome of schizophrenia [1, 4, 5].”

                    4. Sweden did a study with all-cause mortality and milk

                      “High consumers of nonfermented milk (≥2.5 times/d) had a 32% increased hazard (HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.18, 1.48) for all-cause mortality compared with that of subjects who consumed milk ≤1 time/wk. The corresponding value for butter was 11% (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.21). All nonfermented milk-fat types were independently associated with increased HRs, but compared with full-fat milk, HRs were lower in consumers of medium- and low-fat milk.”

                    5. Milk had a 32% increase in all-cause mortality
                      Butter had a 11% increase in all-cause mortality

                      I am surprised that once per week or more milk intake was so much higher than butter.

                      I honestly thought it would be the other way around.

                      So it isn’t just fat.

                      That would be the IGF-1.

                    6. I found a more neutral overview, but they said that the neutral results came from removing the large Swedish study, but they kept the industry studies.

                      Fermented dairy had a slight improvement, so back to the one with the yogurt, having some types of dairy, which improve things combined with the dairy which caused problems would hide what is really happening with nonfermented milk.

                    7. Pete,

                      The studies do go back and forth about dairy.

                      Some are industry studies and if all the ones which go forth are industry studies, then the question remains whether they are designed in ways which confound the studies.

                      But fermented dairy having a mildly positive effect already is one thing, which probably does make it more complicated.

                    8. Pete,

                      I am evaluating the data and still come to the conclusion that I wouldn’t risk it for the endothelials and that I wouldn’t risk it to prevent autoimmune conditions like MS and that I wouldn’t risk the saturated fats for Type 2 Diabetes or heart problems or for Potential Alzheimer’s effects.

                      The type 1 Diabetes research isn’t figured out yet because more and more adults are getting it and that is still likely to be the leaky gut route as one mechanism and milk proteins matching the 17 amino acids of the beta cells exactly means that there is a strong rationale for avoiding it if you have any sense that you even might possibly have a leaky gut at all and more and more people have autoimmune and cluster conditions.

                    9. But I am going to agree with you that some of the tea nutritional benefits might be there even using milk, but your study used high fat milk to increase absorption that way, which causes other problems and your study still said it blocked some catechind very much and some were less effected, but still effected and, either way, you lose your mortality benefits and hurt the endothelials.

            2. Okay, I found what I think is the advice the professionals give about infants and milk:

              At the present time, compliance with the American Academy of
              Pediatrics’recommendations for breast-feeding and the
              avoidance of unmodified cows’ milk during the first year
              of life is prudent.

              1. The paper, which said that, acknowledges that the science became more complicated, rather than less complicated.

                Eventually, I will find someone who can evaluate which results are industry results and whether they were manipulated.

                I ended up finding so many layers of kid’s science videos. Some aimed at pre-school. Some aimed at the grade school level. Some aimed at the junior high/middle school level. Some aimed at the high school. Some aimed at adults. There probably are college and medical levels, too, but I didn’t get there yet.

                Anyway, I am getting better at understanding how ribosomes are produced and where they are in a cell and what they produce and what the rough versus smooth ER does, etc.

                A million steps from now I might figure out how it relates to things like milk, but I am putting in the effort. We will see what happens.

    2. Pete

      Lorenz found that adding milk to tea blocked the beneficial effects of tea on FMD. Obstruse discussions about the precise mechanisms by which this happened, and whether Lorenz’s speculations on the mechanisms were correct or not, only obscure the fact that it did happen.

      Which I suppose is the point. However this isn’t helpful to people who want to know why European and US tea drinkers (who drink tea without milk) seem to gain cardiovascular and mortality benefits from doing so while British tea drinkers (who take theirs with milk) do not and may even suffer negative effects from tea drinking. I am not surprised though that you and other dairy supporters want to stifle all mention of Lorenz’s study.

      1. Tom, Lorenz’s study is a crock. It is completely meaningless unless you happen to be a test tube. You must know that. All the subsequent studies that I referenced demonstrated this. Even the Lorenz team conceded it was next to useless. So, why defend it? Milk added to tea does not reduce the bioavailability of tea polyphenols. That is the truth of the matter. And no amount of repetition from Dr G. disingenuously quoting Lorenz is going to alter that.

        1. “Milk added to tea does not reduce the bioavailability of tea polyphenols. That is the truth of the matter. ”

          Even if that is true Pete, and i am not sure that it is in all cases, how does that negate the finding in the Lorenz study that milk in tea affected FMD? That certainly wasn’t a test tube effect. And what bearing does it have on the studies showing associations between tea drinking and mortality etc benefits, and nil or negative associations with drinking milk and tea. As I have written before, critiquing hypotheses about possible mechanisms of action, doesn’t mean that that the effect itself was illusory.

          The truth of the matter is that milk in tea adversely affects FMD and that drinking tea with milk is associated with higher mortality and cardiovascular risk. Trying to drag the discussion away from those facts to talk about catechin/polyphenol availability seems like a pretty transparent tactic to obscure these key points. You also seem to be misrepresenting Dr G and his post here. He never even mentioned the bioavailability of tea polyphenols. It is pretty clear that he is not the one who is being disingenuous here.

  11. Simplify your lives: drink your coffee and tea straight with nothing added. Easy peasy, and it’s delicious.

    Dip your toes in the water, and try it sometime!

    1. YR mistakenly suggested this: ‘-)

      Simplify your lives: drink your coffee and tea straight with nothing added. Easy peasy, and it’s delicious.
      —————————————————————————–
      I differ with you on this… I never drink my tea straight, no matter if it is tea or herbal “tea.” Some of the things I add are White willow bark drops, Ashwagandha drops, Cilantro w/chlorella drops, chlorophyll drops, vanilla extract drops, oregano drops, bergamot-water drops, clove-water drops… that’s about it… Oh! almost forgot I ran across a forgotten cache of liquid supplements and have started adding drops of those to my last cup ‘o tea of the night. Those new additions are Valerian Root and St. John’s Wort for an even better sleep, plus drops of fenugreek because it has a nice flavor.

      So my regimen is to NEVER drink straight tea… it is too good a vehicle to get more “medicinals” into our bodies.

        1. Heh, nice comeback.

          Just wish I could post a pic of you I found on the Internet… you know, the one when you smacked into a high line post during a fog? ‘-)

          1. What’s with your memory, Lonie? You were the one who took the photo.

            Doncha remember you were flying right behind me on your own little stick? Broomstick, that is.

            1. You were the one who took the photo.

              Doncha remember you were flying right behind me on your own little stick? Broomstick, that is.
              ——————————————————————————–
              Yeah, lucky I had my Hydrogen 1 cellphone on h4v video, otherwise I couldn’t have pulled a still out of the video.

              My problem was I fell off my hydrogen powered pseudo broom (I’m not a real witch… was doing an undercover exposé of you lot so I had a friend rig up the phony broom) and was unable to frame the video properly as I was RITPPL (rollin’ in the pumpkin patch laughing) after I fell off my fake broom. ‘-)

              1. Awww, we’re just a coupla kids with a DEMONIZING imagination, ain’t we!

                Where have we seen that demonizing word before? I mean, recently? :-)

  12. Do we have any science-minded people who want to weigh in about the tea and milk study design?

    Some of us won’t go back to milk because those cows being kept pregnant already was enough to bring me off of milk forever, but I am interested about whether the nutrient binding effect part might be a little different than those particular studies said?

    1. Deb, if you have an ethical problem drinking milk, dont drink it. Nutrition should not an issue for you, other than finding suitable substitutes for milk. Which is where Dr G is actually helpful.
      Just bear in mind the catechins in tea reduce your FMD only 3.5% – with or without milk. If you dont have hypertension it is even less of an issue. So it is not a deal breaker whether you drink tea or not in terms of hypertension. However tea polyphenols have other effects, particularly as antioxidants. The evidence (already presented) suggests milk enhances the antioxidant ability of tea polyphenols. Then there is the issue of taste – which is purely a matter of opinion.

    2. Deb this begins the single longest post ever by anyone in any context on this board…
      “Pete Granger says:
      November 17th, 2017 at 11:02 pm
      Shaylen,
      Understandably I suppose, vegans or vegetarians tend to read scientific or non-scientific literature which reinforces the often emotional decisions they have made. So, if you are looking for bias, perhaps look no further.”

      ….it goes on and on and on and on and….milk and autism
      And his position in statement is clearly for the continuance of the dairy industry as shown in that enormous post…look for it and read it I suggest. His claim made on occasion of only a scientific basis inferred on health aspect…. is just not fact. He fully supports dairy. Though he personally like goats milk or some such….
      I don’t know how many clicks I had to make to get to the end of it but it was a never before experience.

      Enter at your own risk is my recommendation….you have no idea how lengthy this can get. And that was in response to s…who really rarely elaborates. It is truly remarkable in length….this is what you are hazarding.

      1. Find a video with about 250 or so posts on it…and that is the length of his one post….I kid you not.
        Read it your self don’t trust me on it. Milk and autism and that is a quote on the day and time..

        1. Does A2 milk carry less autism risk…a great read.
          I strongly suggest do not incite this guy it will never ever end….read it longest blog ever here on nf …..longest thread ever as result

          1. Ok this is from the coffee milk video..I try to explore trolls to see where they are coming from…this is his response to why are you here?
            ” Pete Granger says:
            October 2nd, 2018 at 6:19 pm
            Ron. It is because I hate fake or distorted news so much. And those who manipulate information for some ulterior motive. So that we no longer know black from white, or up from down. It is a disorientation I can live without. I have no objection whatsoever to a vegan/vegetarian website that offers its readers a multitude of nutritional alternatives to dairy because of ethical or environmental concerns. I believe at times it is an indulgence, but it is a valid enough premise. But that should not translate to SELECTIVE scientific criticism of dairy, and the SELECTIVE omission of unsupported science to reinforce the message. This makes it completely impossible to come to come to a rational decision based on the science.
            Which is the purported purpose of this website. The risk is that more gullible individuals substitute science with a quasi-religious belief system. And making scientific choices on the basis of emotional factors.
            That is, a preferred or comfortable truth, rather than actual truth. The vast bulk of scientific evidence (meta-analysis) demonstrate that dairy is nutritionally beneficial. Not harmful as Dr G. would have you believe. His take is not objective, and he chooses to propagate this lack of objectivity. I make this point for one reason, and one reason only. So you can make a more informed choice. If you prefer instead to make an exclusively ethical choice then all power to you. Finally, it is not ‘disruptive’ to fully inform, unless the reader prefers not to be fully informed. Unfortunately, this is where you are at.”

            So it is in his mind Dr Greger is lying to us…You simply cannot get objective free from bias information from a person with that agenda..He is here for a purpose…that is it as he stated to my quary. He wants the downfall of Dr Greger and thus also this site. He is determined to its end.

            1. Plenty of people hold that view. About half the peoples that favor carnivorism will proport it.

              But the then coming here when that is a stated purpose…..he intends to destroy,not build.
              And as you may notice from the posts I have mentioned..and yes there are others….he has been at this mission for quite some time and go to any length to succeed at it.
              I am good at one thing…getting peoples to express intent either through action or word. He expressed his….to his great detriment.
              He now will have to pursue another identity to continue with his mission. It simply does not work when peoples are on to him.

      2. Haa, all that endless ‘wisdom’ has been wasted on you Ron. You much prefer the cherry-picking type of science; that pulls out and propagates the bits that reinforce your belief system, and ignores that which contradicts it.
        Especially if it is ‘complicated’. [‘complicated’ is the enemy, and in all probability is a conspiracy, right? ]. So your solution is to cut through all that crap and ‘simplify’, for the good of mankind. A practice that has more in common with religion than science. Whatever it takes to hit that comfort zone.

        1. Meaning..your endless wisdom?

          I don’t give a flying capital F about the health consequences of being vegan personally. I am in it for the ethical part of it. A POS like you thinks that a indulgence….so what POS, who give a flying F what you think about what I eat. Who are you ex ceo of some second rate internet company or something…who gives a f about you and your opinion.

          I stay reasonably healthy and that is good enough. If I had to live to take some animal prescription, I would.
          Dr Greger seems to give it a go. The best go, and only go, and never without a fault…no Who does not favor this or that, we all do. But to come here on this site and slam they guy his stuff and his people…in wham bam thank you mam…bad form.
          Making you a POS.

          Pretty nice peoples here, a bit sily, a bit obsessed with sweating the little stuff at times, a few way young, a few way old…but Ok pretty, good not bad peoples.
          And you want to crush all that and them under your ideological mission tilting after windmills crushing any and others under your feet, as you are on a quest, a gods quest to right this evil….go F yourself.
          Go take your f*&^ing cows with you and all go f yourself POS.
          This is Gregers site not a you tube site..go f with you tube and your holy mission.

          1. Who wants you here POS? Who asked for is asking for, will ever ask for, your wonderful enlightenment?
            Who…..no one not a single f*&ing solitary sole is who…

            Pages and pages of irritating nonsense with not a person wishing for it nor asking for it….and you keep on keeping on providing it?
            How f*&^ing mad are you. It is not a question of being insane that is established..but how f*&ing insane? Mission..gods mission then? My guess is that is it…is it? One of these fanatics who think being vegan is against god..that it POS?

            HuH that it?

            1. I should not have to give life lessons to a older guy like you but you plainly need it…

              I am buddhist by means that I employ. I am not buddhist by formal tradition anymore. Why… I found by substantial verifiable published source subsequent to freedom of information request that the Dali Lama was paid by the CiA from the time of his exodus until Nixon established relations. In excess of 100k per year.

              Now I know what the CIA is..religious leaders do not work for them and they do not give money every year in salary to those who do not work for them.
              So that is that and this is this.
              Do I go to buddhist sites, I have boatloads of training I have bunches of empowerments, and go hit at their faiths…no that would be in bad form. I do not hold their views but know them how to hit at them how it hurts and where it does not..I spend years and years in the thing learning studying and many times in wilderness and retreat house…all of it.

              I do not as it would be in poor form. I may be right or wrong, but it is what they like, they believe and they hold true to. If everything else is S, this is not…to them. It is perhaps only that holding them together. How can I destroy that..for what my truth?

              You need to fully consider that and reconsider how you are acting. Many times I have considered that and how I could go back physically here or there or to sites and with this or that..but I never do as I know…better. When perhaps once I did not.

              Learn this you POS….compassion for other POS. For once in your life consider others and your effects upon them….idiot wake the f up . For what your cause?
              YOu idiot.

            2. Hey Ron, down boy, down! Aren’t you no-animal food types supposed to be calm, cool and collected?

              Never heard (read) so much cussin’ in all me life! :-)

              1. Ok we cannot pretend away this guy says thing like this and wish it was all fine and dandy….
                He really said this…

                “This now below, is his opening line in answer to my question………. why are you here on this site expressing contrary information to Dr Greger
                “Ron. It is because I hate fake or distorted news so much. And those who manipulate information for some ulterior motive. So that we no longer know black from white, or up from down. It is a disorientation I can live without. I have no objection whatsoever to a vegan/vegetarian website that offers its readers a multitude of nutritional alternatives to dairy because of ethical or environmental concerns. I believe at times it is an indulgence, but it is a valid enough premise”

                He wants to bring down Dr Greger. I am not Dr Gregers brother or anything, but lots find this site useful and like it….so I am adverse to those who have that sentiment Dr Greer is faking and distorting information no matter how politely stated.

      3. But Pete also gave a synopsis of what each link stated. Anyone can fact check that by reading each link. You seem to decry the length of the post… I for one see the length and the detail as due diligence.

        Dr no-big-Mac Greger should seek him out to join his team. If Pete signs off on it he could be assured there could be no accusations of cherry-picked studies. ‘-)

      4. Ron,

        There is a Bible verse:

        Study to show yourself approved so that you don’t get tossed to or fro from every wind of doctrine.

        I got blown like a leave in the wind going round and round because of the culture being oppositional and so complicated and confusing.

        I know that you have already wrestled these concepts with Pete and I am not going to do the process the same as you or Tom would.

        I do not have the science background. I do have a brain condition. I don’t have a team of researchers to help me read all of the studies and nobody has made music videos with those studies yet. I can send requests to the science music video guy but he is teaching high school science.

        I need to take science for dummies classes and do my best to listen.

        I need to hear Pete’s side because I am going to be going out to picnics and parties and people are going to be doing the milk process authoritatively and I need to slowly come to understand the complexities.

        I didn’t go vegan until 2018 and it is going to take me another 6 months to be an expert.

  13. Thanks Pete and Ron and Tom,

    I appreciate the discussion.

    Pete, I appreciate the dissenting opinion. I have no doubt that a year from now I will understand dairy more because of these discussions.

    Ron, I understand that you have already done this process and that it is quite lengthy. For me, I am trying to increase in my understanding of the whole picture. I tend to be someone who talks people through the quagmire of information on the Internet. Understanding the sides of the equation keeps me from being side-swiped in these conversations.

    I do believe you that the industries do from flam studies and I also do believe Pete that people following each way of eating do tend to look for information which correlates with the foundation they believe in.

    If there was a second study about the tea and milk which contradicted the findings of the other study, I have to do the slow process of analyzing those studies and seeing which study has design flaws and which one uses more ethical practices and which one uses statistics in scam ways.

    I do not agree with Pete calling a study finding pseudoscience even if a second study revealed different information.

    Dr Greger has plenty of other reasons to not like dairy, so I hold my tongue about his researchers. Just this week’s information. The endothelials is enough to question dairy. The Mediterranean Diet people dying less when saturated fat sources like dairy were removed is interesting and removing saturated fat as how to reverse Diabetes would be three things.

    The Type 1 Diabetes risk response was interesting. I would have to look and see if there are opposing studies, but I appreciate the information.

    I will have to watch the Breast feeding versus formula video again.

    Yes, I will not drink dairy for ethical reasons and I also stopped because I had Cancer and Diabetes and Alzheimer’s symptoms. I had such big cognitive issues, plus eye issues and horizontal nail ridges and I had a lump on my Breast and eczema on the same nipple with itching and other things. They are all gone now. I was also having hallucinations at night. It all seems so much better.

    Anyway, I am not going to be taking the risk of increasing growth hormone or saturated fats, but I also do want to understand things.

    When I first started here, I didn’t have the cognitive ability to process any information. I am getting there now.

    1. Oh I also had the beginning of nerve pain and I couldn’t focus my eyes and had such trouble driving. I really can’t list all of the things and I don’t know how much of the improvement came from getting rid of cheese and milk, but I didn’t start losing weight until I got rid of them so I just am not going back.

      1. I didn’t Fire myself but I could have. I couldn’t function to get my work done for probably a few years. I don’t Fire anybody else either so nobody complained and my accountant filed for extensions but I really, really, really, really broke down mentally.

        1. I can tell you that I got rid of cheese, milk, white flour and sugar, but the sugar came much earlier. I didn’t lose any weight getting rid of sugar and I still had the lump and eczema and nerve pain and nail ridges until I got rid of the milk and cheese. So I am likely to argue anti-milk, too, but most of the people I care about need me to be balanced and to understand the arguments from multiple sides. Trying to do that.

          1. I also had something like psoriasis on my hands. My cousin has properly diagnosed psoriasis and I didn’t go to a doctor for any of it and my father would agree with all of you that I might not have had anything and now the evidence is almost completely gone.

            The brain has taken so long. And Tom, you might be right, it might have been a mini-stroke or whatever Dr Hyman had or aluminum on the brain or homocysteine or just wildly out of control blood sugar or cluster autoimmune.

            It is something the world will never know.
            I gave up the flour and sugar long before the milk and cheese which is why I feel like getting rid of the milk and cheese accomplished the most.

          2. So I am likely to argue anti-milk, too, but most of the people I care about need me to be balanced and to understand the arguments from multiple sides. Trying to do that.
            —————————————————————–
            First person account that speaks volumes to those who may be experiencing problems. Much better than accusing posters who differ in their findings as an automatic response against.

            Personally I do take into account the dueling studies, and in the case of milk consumption I’ll eat or drink the occasional “health” drink that contains some form of milk, but I know that milk itself gives me noticeable problems that I don’t have when I do not consume it regularly.

    2. Deb this is his expressed intention, I quote and paste him the full discussion is in the coffee and milk video…… “Dr G. would have you believe. His take is not objective, and he chooses to propagate this lack of objectivity.”

      This now below, is his opening line in answer to my question………. why are you here on this site expressing contrary information to Dr Greger

      “Ron. It is because I hate fake or distorted news so much. And those who manipulate information for some ulterior motive. So that we no longer know black from white, or up from down. It is a disorientation I can live without. I have no objection whatsoever to a vegan/vegetarian website that offers its readers a multitude of nutritional alternatives to dairy because of ethical or environmental concerns. I believe at times it is an indulgence, but it is a valid enough premise”

      That is not this minor thing you state…” do not agree with Pete calling a study finding pseudoscience even if a second study revealed different information. ”

      He believes Dr Gregers work is manipulating information for a ulterior motive. It is clearly stated.
      WE cannot disbelieve evil bad or ugly things because we do not like their look. We must at times accept that peoples will occasionally reveal truths as to motivation and presence…this is one.
      I will not belabor the point he has clearly stated it.He wants the downfall of Dr Greger as he considers him to intentionally misrepresent the truth, which is very important to him.
      So he persists here. Fine to do that and think that in a neutral forum you tube perhaps, it is just opinion. To come here on Dr Gregers site with such elaboration and effort and time devoted…he wants firmly to do something about it, and that about does not involve its continuance.

      I have seen sites destroyed by trolls for various and sundry reasons. The political the Russians the US China…they are most ruthless heinous and will stop at nothing…this is minor a walk in the part in comparison to those concerted efforts by all…but it is still what it is…aiming to destroy what other cherish.

      1. Ron,

        You have to know by now that I love Dr Greger and I love Whole Food Plant Based.

        I am not going to throw Dr Greger or his research team under the bus.

        I also like politeness and don’t like ad honimum attacks on anyone if possible.

        I do not like Pete calling a science research study pseudoscience unless there is evidence that the study was faked or distorted.

        He uses points like skim milk versus whole milk and it is reasonable to me that those two things would test differently so there are points where I can put my internal question marks up.

        I watched the behind the scenes videos for this site and do believe that a ridiculously extensive process is done for each video and I do not believe that there is intentional manipulation at all. I do suspect that there is vegan bias to some extent because people always have belief system bias. The question is more is that belief system founded on something which has solid science or not.

        Ron, I researched Keto for my dogs and I do know that they have healed dogs Cancer and I have seen doctors who get people off of insulin that way, but I have also seen low carb studies where it increases heart attack and stroke risk by 50 and 51% and increases Cancer risk by 35% and I have people in mind who have died after losing weight that way and I have a friend with Cancer. The Keto group says that the study didn’t go low enough carb and I would have fed my dog the 90% coconut oil to try that but he wouldn’t eat coconut oil at all and I threw it up every time I tried it pre-coming here when I was following the brain doctors.

        My Keto friend who has Cancer is not getting healed via Keto and my dog isn’t getting healed from his Cancer via Vegan, but he is still alive from a type of Cancer where he shouldn’t have lived 2 weeks.

        I know you are protective over Dr Gregers reputation and don’t want Pete to succeed at bringing him down at all and neither do I.

        I also do believe that Pete can be sincere that he feels that there is science out there which isn’t being represented.

        Well, this is my process for everything. I try to listen and I try to understand. I don’t understand yet whether Petes studies are legitimate or not and I haven’t tested his agenda yet. Those processes take me a long time.

        I do appreciate your feedback though.

        1. Ron,

          i do respect your sincerity. You are helpful to me often and Tom, so are you.

          It will be good for me if I can learn some of these opposing studies and learn what is right and wrong with them.

          I have friends who Pete would confuse entirely and they don’t want to eat their vegetables in the first place and they would throw Dr Greger out with the bath water rather than test the bath water itself.

          I go to sites like Happy Healthy Vegan and Mic the Vegan because they sometimes take on the studies and I wish there was a WFPB person who had a site for each of these opposing studies to be examined.

          Tom, you remembering the studies helps me. I end up having to look them up and try to figure them out over and over again.

          The wealthy versus very poor study comes back to me when you say it.

          1. I didn’t want to give up dairy a year ago and if I had read Pete’s comments back then, I might not have done it, but I am so glad I didn’t read his comments back then.

            I am not afraid of Diabetes or Cancer or Stroke or Heart attacks now and as much as I lived dairy I was afraid for good reason.

    3. I don’t mind Pete posting here. I don’t mind Greg posting here. They are polite about it and cite studies which they argue support their beliefs. They don’t just endlessly assert their opinions, and engage in gratuitous personal attacks, which is what he who shall not be named did, and was eventually banned for his sins.

      It’s good to have our beliefs challenged from time to time, especially if the contrary evidence is linked so we can all have a look at it. I think Ron has gone overboard in his responses because I have no reason to think that Pete and Greg aren’t entirely sincere in holding the beliefs that they do. We should respect that.

      1. Tom, when I first posted on this list (early 2017) you chastised Lonie for communicating with me. I think I was described as the ‘bad guy’ from ‘Big Dairy’. That was my welcome to ‘nutritionfacts’. I tried hard not to respond in kind. Here we are two years later and my irritating contributions are being (sort of) welcomed (we will exclude ‘Bee in his Bonnett’, and a few others from this). My sole purpose has been for those who read this forum to understand that there is a broader dimension to the selective scientific message they obtain from Dr G. when it comes to dairy.
        I do this because this is what the science overwhelmingly tells me.

        I have no reason to support dairy other than 60 years ago I dreamed of being a dairy farmer. Never really got close, but it gave me something ‘good’ to believe in at the time. In my imaginary world I could be involved in animal husbandry without the cruelty bit. The cows did not have to die for my sins. Probably naive of me, but I still cling to that juvenile dream. And I still love cows with a passion.

        1. Pete, dairy farms can stink…literally. Back in the day, my father owned both a house in town (where he worked in a bank) and a farm a few miles outta town — which he rented to a family who “worked the farm.” They shared milk income. There were dairy cows,chickens, lots of apple orchards, watermelons, beautiful Wisconsin woods to trek (ah, those were the days!).

          As a little 4-year old, I’d watch the cows being milked (by hand; do they still do that?). Never really liked its taste, though…always had to have a cookie or something to go with it. Other dairy foods were fine.

          There was one cow I got to like, named Sukey. One day I didn’t see her and wondered why. Hmmmm. :-(

          Anyway, dairy farms seemed to be a lot of work…pretty stinky too, what with all that manure!

        2. Pete

          I had a vague memory that you were the marketing manager for the Victorian dairy board or whatever it was called (Victoria is one of the Australian states) but wasn’t aware at the time that you had moved on from that position. Hence my response at the time.

          The science overwhelmingly tells me something different from what it apparently tells you!

          Also, even though mainstream US and Western dietary advice does include dairy, it usually recommends low or no fat dairy because of the well known problems with high fat dairy consumption. The World Health Organization, possibly because it does not have a politically influential,dairy industry on its hands unlike the US, UK Europe and Australasia, does not recommend dairy foods at all but says that if people eat them, they should choose reduced fat options.
          http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-diet

          I notice that you don’t seem this aspect in your posts .

          1. Yes Mr FumbleFingers, I recall him having ‘Dairy Industry Consultant’ written top- center of his disqus profile when NF was using that platform.

            1. Long-time lapsed dairy industry consultant Barb, actually lapsed 40 years ago. I am considering a comeback if I make it to 100.
              Anyway, there is a broader issue here which is worth mentioning. There are billions of dairy consumers, dairy farmers and manufacturers. They are the majority – by a very long shot. If you want to convince them to switch to veganism or vegetarianism you dont treat them as heathens, or the enemy. As I was. You persuade them with:

              1. Scientific evidence 2. Environmental evidence 3. Animal ethics

              However, you will not convince others if you simply cherry pick the scientific evidence to promote your cause. This only serves to convince the already convinced, not the hordes of unconvinced.
              I take Dr Gs pearls (of which there are quite a few), and ignore the rest – which border on unscientific propaganda.

              I like smart, passionate people – and Tom is certainly one of those. But the moment he made that initial comment about me to Lonie it demonstrated an extreme bias against dairy that belied the scientific objectivity he otherwise attempts to cultivate in his many posts. Which he insists on when analysing the scientific claims that support dairy, and is much less insistent on when treating the claims of plant-based diets. I dont mind so much because this is an undeclared but nonetheless de-facto vegetarian/vegan website. I suppose my principle objection is to its presentation as scientifically objective and unbiased. Which it is not, as Toms response to me back then in 2017 well demonstrated.

              1. Pete

                Neither your original post nor your background gave the impression that you were an ordinary consumer just coming here for an exchange of views about the science on this issue..

                You seemed to be someone paid to promote dairy interests in online forums like this. We already had one such when you arrived. Some bloke in NZ I think, who said upfront (to his considerable credit) that he had a contract to promote dairy interests online and in social media.

                You, on the other hand, as an (ex) dairy board marketing manager, were presenting yourself as an ordinary Joe while not initially disclosing your dairy industry background. This, frankly, appeared deceptive and it’s hardly surprising that you weren’t exactly welcomed with open arms.

                1. Not so Tom. I declared my previous employment as soon as I started posting.
                  Its just that you did not read it. Someone on the list subsequently reminded you that I had made the declaration. Which you also appear to have forgotten. If you go far back enough you will see the exchanges.
                  I understand your reservations about a paid (dairy) consultant posting on the forum. But their bias is no different to the bias Dr G (and yourself) have for vegan/vegetarianism. I really think the problem here is the changing of the name from ‘veganfacts’ to ‘nutritionfacts’. And creating the impression it represented more mainstream nutritional science. Which it does, but only within the parameters of vegan/vegetarianism. I very much doubt I would even bother posting on ‘veganfacts’ – or whatever it was previously called. I am actually disinclined to continue posting on ‘nutrition facts’, other than I get my dander up when dairy is wrongly maligned, and people are mislead. I feel protective about dairying and dairy products – but I would not bother if the science told me differently.

                  1. OK, thanks Pete. I certainly don’t remember you posting your background in the very first post of yours that I saw but I’m happy to take your word for it.

                    As for NutritionFacts, Dr Greger has said that the scientific evidence suggests that a whole food plant based diet (WFPB) is the healthiest but that the jury is still out on whether a WFPB diet that is 100% vegetarian is better or worse than a WFPB diet that includes some animal foods. However, he does say that if people choose to eat a 100% vegetarian diet then they should supplement that diet with B12, DHA/EPA and perhaps some other vitamins/minerals.
                    https://nutritionfacts.org/2011/09/12/dr-gregers-2011-optimum-nutrition-recommendations/

                    My view is that if people don’t, won’t or can’t supplement, then they need to eat a WFPB diet that includes a small amount of animal foods. By small, I mean less than 10% of total calories. From what I have seen, these calories should come from small deepwater oily fish or low fat dairy (not meat).

                    Dr Greger personally appears to be a vegan but he has never claimed that the science conclusively shows that a so-called vegan diet is the healthiest. As an aside, I eat a 100% vegetarian diet myself but I am not a vegan and get a bit miffed when people insist on describing a real vegetarian diet as a vegan diet. But then again, that is just the bee buzzing around in my bonnet.

                    I choose to eat a 100% vegetarian diet primarily for ethical and environmental reasons. If I were going purely on the nutritional science, I would choose to eat a WFPB diet that included a couple of oily fish servings a week. This would probably be the safest option for most people since I have seen estimates that up to 75% of the world’s adult population is lactose intolerant and can’t drink milk.
                    https://genetics.thetech.org/original_news/news45

                    Finally, I would argue that Dr Greger’s position is in fact consistent with mainstream nutritional science. Here’s the reason why

                    The US dietary guidelines may be considered the authoritative statement of the minstream nutritional position. They advise that people should eat more vegetables, fruit and wholegrains (that sounds like another way of saying a WFPB diet to me). They also identify and recommend a number of healthful dietary patterns including the Healthy Vegetarian Pattern, They state that
                    “This Pattern can be vegan if all dairy choices are comprised of fortified soy beverages (soymilk) or other plant-based dairy substitutes.”
                    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-5/

                    Furthermore, those Guidelines also state that
                    “As recommended by the IOM,[24] individuals should eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern.”
                    https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/chapter-1/a-closer-look-inside-healthy-eating-patterns/#other-components

                    It can therefore be argued that, since the only Healthy Dietary Pattern that has zero dietary cholesterol is the ‘vegan’ Healthy Vegetarian Pattern, then the logical implication is that this is the diet that we should all be eating and that nutritionists should be recommending.

                    1. Thanks Tom. Do not disagree with anything you have said, other than the whole cholesterol/saturated fat thing is far from settled, at least to my mind. This applies especially to dairy saturated fats, which differ from other animal fats. But it is quite complex and cannot be outlined in a short reply. Perhaps I will sit still for a day, without distraction, and attempt to do so.
                      Aside from the ethical aspect (which I respect) there is sufficient scientific evidence to limit the consumption of meat, which is what I attempt to do. Other than sardines or oily, deep ocean fish such as trevally.

                    2. YR, for better or worse, I am a profligate, mostly agnostic cheese fanatic.
                      I love it all, apart from that stuff that smells like smelly socks. Beats me how people can enjoy it.

                    3. Full cream yoghurt I make myself, and add fruit. Too much sugar (and additives) in the commercial varieties.

                    4. Sounds good, Pete. Never tried making yogurt myself; might take it up sometime.

                      As I’ve posted before, I also like me some Horizon Organic Mozzarella string cheese. I wish they’d make them easier to open, though. The “peel here” thingie should be longer, IMO.

          1. Pete

            You might want to rephrase this sentence

            ‘And I still love cows with a passion’.
            ————————————————————-
            Heh, funny Tom.

            But having grown up on a farm and having had to milk cows by hand, I can understand how someone can have a love for a species.

            1. Lonie,

              I understand having a love for species, too, but it is easy to mistake the love for species for love.

              Passion often runs counter to love and passion often does the opposite.

              We have dairy barns near me with kind-hearted people, but I guarantee they did a mental process to be able to love cows and emotionally distance themselves from them at the same time.

              Roger and Me documentary has a scene where a woman is selling rabbits for pets or meat. Meaning that no matter how much she passionately loves raising rabbits, it is money that she is raising them for.

              I have a friend who raised some and needed to get rid of them but couldn’t bring herself to sell them for meat, even though it was easier to sell them for meat.

        3. I ran into this same thing back in the day. A religious board really very popular the internet back in that day hot, new, everyone was on it, and it was in the main intelligent discourse. 90’s for a brief time.

          I was involved back in that day one religious board. A hundred religions, remarkable, peoples who led them were invited and did participate remarkable.
          ONe guy showed up in the buddhist section with his own form of religion. He would post enormous posts truly intricate and in depth and they would go on for pages and pages.

          The what of that…he had self published a internet book of 300 or some pages, and would simply cut and past comments to counter arguments. So it was simple and he could dominate any argument with sheer volume if nothing else.
          So what to do…..the place set him up his own board site in the interest of free speech and had him disallowed the regular buddhist board. Fine you have your own form of this thing, report on it here….
          OK..how many visited his site when established to discourse debate or anything….zero.

          Cumbya folks….. entertain this guy at your own peril. JL came within a hairs breath of bringing down this site and this guy will as well…all you have to do is encourage and NF will cease to be a vehicle for Dr Gregers views in a discussion debate format.
          Go back to that discussion I visited earlier…try to read through it, diary and autism 2, the second blog…..no one entertains what was occurring there then.

          At least this is just dairy..oh well cede dairy, then any topic on dairy is now kaput. This guy will show up and it will be same old same old. One thing I guess possibly the board survives.
          That guy I mention it was but one form of buddhism zen, but they had to do a thing. I expect with time this becomes apparent again with this fellow. He needs a ban. Same as JL needed one but did not get one for how long.They can go to you tube and discuss the videos they are all there every one. Blogs no but this is after all Dr Gregers site not a neutral place.

      2. I have repeated this very many times and will now to provide a conclusion of sorts..
        “This now below, is his opening line in answer to my question………. why are you here on this site expressing contrary information to Dr Greger
        “Ron. It is because I hate fake or distorted news so much. And those who manipulate information for some ulterior motive. So that we no longer know black from white, or up from down. It is a disorientation I can live without. I have no objection whatsoever to a vegan/vegetarian website that offers its readers a multitude of nutritional alternatives to dairy because of ethical or environmental concerns. I believe at times it is an indulgence, but it is a valid enough premise”

        I will not allow myself another dairy threat while this guy participates. He is here to destroy the reputation of Dr Greger and there is no point in discussion and debate as evidenced by the autism and milk 2 blog and discussion..it got no where. I did not participate in that one, it is obvious to the read..if one has a few days to read just his posts.

        So we will see if in the end it becomes a Tom and this fellow discussion, when dairy presents and none others are responding to his stuff… we will see. I certainly have had my say and will not participate in endless fruitless discussion to the detriment of this site. I expect he will on occasion find a few unawares of his lengthy and less than stellar behaviors of past.

        1. Here is his full response to my quary why are you here on this site providing debate completely contrary to Dr Gregers expressions in video.. it speaks for itself all you have to do is read it…

          ” ” Pete Granger says:
          October 2nd, 2018 at 6:19 pm
          Ron. It is because I hate fake or distorted news so much. And those who manipulate information for some ulterior motive. So that we no longer know black from white, or up from down. It is a disorientation I can live without. I have no objection whatsoever to a vegan/vegetarian website that offers its readers a multitude of nutritional alternatives to dairy because of ethical or environmental concerns. I believe at times it is an indulgence, but it is a valid enough premise. But that should not translate to SELECTIVE scientific criticism of dairy, and the SELECTIVE omission of unsupported science to reinforce the message. This makes it completely impossible to come to come to a rational decision based on the science.
          Which is the purported purpose of this website. The risk is that more gullible individuals substitute science with a quasi-religious belief system. And making scientific choices on the basis of emotional factors.
          That is, a preferred or comfortable truth, rather than actual truth. The vast bulk of scientific evidence (meta-analysis) demonstrate that dairy is nutritionally beneficial. Not harmful as Dr G. would have you believe. His take is not objective, and he chooses to propagate this lack of objectivity. I make this point for one reason, and one reason only. So you can make a more informed choice. If you prefer instead to make an exclusively ethical choice then all power to you. Finally, it is not ‘disruptive’ to fully inform, unless the reader prefers not to be fully informed. Unfortunately, this is where you are at.”

          1. Ron,

            I can see how deeply emotional you are about this. I know his using words like “fake” and “pseudoscience” is incendiary.

            I don’t perceive Dr. Greger as being threatened by this discussion and I will tell you that if Pete was putting him down, I would be standing up to it, and I guess I do stand up against the accusation against Dr Greger as presenting pseudoscience and genuinely would love to hear what he or his researchers think about the study with the nutrient absorption which Pete talked about as having a different outcome with a different process.

            It doesn’t make me want dairy, but it makes me want to understand if one test is superior to the other or not.

            Pete is polite and is not doing this process every topic, just milk.

            Pete,

            Dr Greger has a way of eating design to save lives and isn’t likely to back up on dairy because of saturated fat and because of the improvement of people on the Mediterranean diet removing things like dairy and becsuse of Growth Hormones.

            But the nutrient absorption thoughts have enough questions to make me hopeful about soy milk. Who knows, maybe the method of testing isn’t complete enough.

    1. According to Berkeley

      “No one knows. The studies suggesting health benefits have looked at people who drink a lot of regular tea, not decaf. The benefits apparently come from antioxidant compounds called flavonoids. Decaf tea generally contains less of these, though flavonoid content varies widely among teas, so it is hard to predict. The levels also depend on how the tea was processed. Moreover, not all types of flavonoids are lower in decaf tea, and it’s not known which ones are most important. A few studies suggest that decaffeinated teas do have potential anti-cancer effects. For instance, one study found that smokers who drank four cups of decaffeinated green tea daily for four months had significantly reduced DNA damage, as shown by urine tests. Another study gauged the total antioxidant capacity of various teas and found that some decafs rank higher than some regular teas.”
      http://www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/food/article/decaf-healthy-choice

    2. Hi I’m a RN health support volunteer. That is a great question. I don’t know if it has been directly studied with tea. I have read of studies that have looked at the antioxidants in coffee and the same benefits were received from decaf. I’m sorry I don’t have those actual studies to reference. I can look for them. I do not think it is the caffeine that brings the benefit. I think it is the antioxidants which bring the benefit. Decaf tea retains its color which would suggest it retains the antioxidants. They used to use some really toxic chemical methods to remove the caffeine from coffee and tea, but that has improved greatly in recent years.
      NurseKelly

      1. The beneficial components of coffee and tea are the catechins/polyphenols, not the caffeine. Therefore:

        1. Is there a synergy between caffeine and catechins/polyphenols, and if so, is it affected by decaffeination 2. Does decaffeination significantly diminish catechin/polyphenol levels

        ‘During the decaffeination process, losses of key flavour components generally occur (Silvarola *et al*., 2004), especially when using solvents that lack specificity, such as water’

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/decaffeination

        However, one study in rats demonstrated that polyphenols are retained in decaffeinated green tea.:

        ‘One bag of green tea contains 80–100 mg of polyphenols, of which EGCG accounts for about 25–30 mg.45 An experiment on rats showed that the plasma level of EGCG was 0.1% (v/v) after intragastric administration of decaffeinated green tea46’

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/decaffeination

        The method of decaffeination also appears to influence the outcome:

        ….’a large percentage of tea catechins were lost if rolled leaf and dry tea were decaffeinated by the hot water treatment and so the process is not suitable for processing black tea’

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/decaffeination

        This report refers to a method of extraction which preserves polyphenols during the decaffeination process:

        …’supercritical carbon dioxide (SCCO2) extraction that remove 80.1% of the caffeine from cocoa powder while retaining theobromine (94.1%) and polyphenols (84.7%).’

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5302282/

        I think the prudent thing to do is contact decaffeinated tea and coffee manufacturers and request details on their method of extraction, and % retention of polyphenols – and then post the results on this forum.

  14. I didn’t see anyone mention one of my reasons for dropping non-dairy milk in my coffee: all those cartons in my recycling bin, and my doubts about them actually being recycled. I did not enjoy my foray into homemade almond and soy milk. I discovered that I loved straight green or white tea. I now like black coffee, but feel better not drinking coffee. I think the tea has made me more relaxed and had positive mood benefits – tea has been surprisingly medicinal for me, and I’m glad I didn’t block any of that with milk.

    Eliminating an entire class of packaging from my waste stream is in itself a good result for giving up plant milks in beverages. The more stuff I buy without packaging the better, and this was an easy target.

  15. To Pete and Greg…you guys get me sorely pissed. But I do apologize for the calling of names and such.

    I don’t need or want necessarily to run you off, but suggest a more moderate content display may be more conducive of challenge display. I would suggest one item challenge by item, will allow for logical rebuttal. Displaying a large number of challenges is just making for a atmosphere not conducive to discussion to my opinion. A item by item display in itself, will allow for consideration of each individually and response can be of variance by speciality and interest. You will probably get more responses and more views of your items if conducted in this fashion to my opinion.

    I don’t represent this board in any manner but I suggest that in the interest of furthering communication.
    Sorry

    1. Standard debate in fact follows in this fashion. There is a general statement of intention claim or response to claim then from that a separate one by one specification with reference on how or why this item it true or untrue.
      Never is a basic claim made and then multiple references thrown into the debate, throwing the all of the thing the argument and support into it..it is just not manageable. How does a debater respond..which one do they choose and why? No….it is selection of items which most represent position in a one by one basis to allow for consideration and retort, after a explaination of contrary view.

      This allows for response. Just throwing them all up in one big chunk of statement really does not. One can add a statement of inclusion, such as I start with this but will add additional support.
      Gives a position to start from and end up. And in a open debate one by one addressing of issues can be accomplished.

    2. Ron,

      Thank you for apologizing.

      If all of us can do these things as discussions without ad hominem attacks on Dr. Greger or each other, that would be so great!

      I appreciate it very much!

  16. it seems to me that this a lot of dust being thrown into the air by people who appear to have vested interest in the outcome of the discussion. There is a lot of discussion of a possible mechanism for the decreased observed effects of these studies. However, the fact remains that epithelial function improvement is diminished by the addition of cows milk in tea-by whatever mechanism. We are not only unable to see the Forest for the trees, but worse we are beginning to examine individual leaves on the trees. learning mechanisms can be helpful for the future, but we should not lose sight of the final destination-which in this case is that dairy milk is not beneficial to endothelial function. As has been stated before, it is not necessary to win a debate, just make it so confusing but people don’t care. I think that is what being done in this case.

    I would be interested to know whether people drinking tea without milk, such as iced tea (hopefully as minimally adulterated with sugar as possible) showed the same benefit as drinking hot tea. Dr. G, do you have any studies with ice tea?

  17. Just saw a commercial that left me wondering… does milk with the lactose removed (Lactaid) have the same effect good or bad on drinking milk?

    1. If I remember correctly, in the Lorenz study, it was the protein casein in milk which blunted the positive effects on FMD from tea consumption.

      Therefore simply removing the lactose is unlikely to affect this (although to my knowledge, that has never been studied). There is I suppose a possibility that it could magnify the effect since casein would then form a relatively higher proportion of the milk than in milk without the lactose removed (all other things being equal). But that is just speculation on my part.

    2. Hi Lonie, Lactose free milk splits lactose into glucose and galactose. Given that it emulates what otherwise happens in the gut, it is difficult to believe it makes a significant nutritional difference. It does however make milk taste sweeter, which might act as disincentive to adding sugar. I would minimise its unnecessary use in children. Given that lactose stimulates the body to make lactase, children could lose the ability to make this enzyme.

    1. Yuri, Oat milk is quite expensive. Nutritionally, you are better of consuming a bowl of porridge a day (its what I do). Porridge has more fibre than oat milk (some of the fibre from the whole grain kernel is strained out in oat milk). Moreover, processing oats (eg converting it into oat milk) messes with beta glucan – which is the really good stuff in oats.

      ‘The cholesterol-lowering effect of oat is thought to be associated with the β-glucan it contains. However, not all food products containing β-glucan seem to lead to the same health outcome. ….highly processed β-glucan sources (where the oat tissue is highly disrupted) appear to be less effective at reducing serum cholesterol, but the reasons are not well understood.
      …..unrefined β-glucan-rich oat-based foods (where some of the plant tissue remains intact) often appear more efficient at lowering cholesterol than purified β-glucan added as an ingredient.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29431835

      1. Ok first Oat milk is not very expensive if you live in the states…. https://www.target.com/p/pacific-foods-organic-oat-non-dairy-beverage-32-fl-oz/-/A-

        This 32 ox at target 2.99. The price varies for the different fake milks but the protein added ones of different types seem most expensive.
        And you do not seem to be asking about any additional benefit of it…… but if it has the blocking properties Dr Gereger is mentioning. Nothing in study shows it does.
        If Pete G has some study to show that…I would like to see it. I have not seen every study on everything nutritional so I would not rule out a possible, a probable, yes I would rule that out.

        1. Well, there is a difference between plant-milks.

          This is advice for feeding infants because one infant died from a plant-milk.

          “For infants, For infants, higher fat choices such as breast milk and infant formula (cow’s milk or soy) are recommended and for children up until the age of 2, again breast milk, soy formula or full-fat (homogenized) cow’s milk are advised. The fat is needed for brain development. After 2 years of age, fortified soy milk can replace the formula while lower-fat cow’s milk can be introduced.

          Not all plant-based milks are created equal When you look at most other plant-based beverages, other than soy and pea(-see below), such as almond, coconut or rice milk, most don’t measure up. Consider that a cup of almond milk may contain only 4 whole almonds or 1 gram of protein. Some contain added sugar – some with enough to actually be considered as a sugar-sweetened beverage. If youngsters are then filling up on these fluids, there may not be room for other foods which may supply necessary protein and calories. As a result, growth and development can be compromised.”

          1. Deb plant milks are never advisable for any infants. They must drink formula which can be of varying content source depending on many factors.

            The number of children that die from formula usually powdered as opposed to breast milk when breast milk is available is to my dim recollection 300,000 annually globally. To provide a bit of context to this. Which is why WHO and all recognized authorities recommend breast milk when it is available to be given to infants and to continue in a lessening fashion up until at least 2 years of age.

            1. Plant milk as opposed to apple juice and some other juices…I find nothing that suggests apple juice normally found in supermarkets for very young children is in any way superior to any plant milk. IN fact one company was found to be selling apple juice which was really water with sugar in it, a while back, Not some outlier a major supplier of the stuff. I can provide a link.

              Apple juice or a fortified plant milk…I’d take the plant milk hands down personally.

              1. One apple juice kid specific typical for the industry…
                “Nutrition summary:
                Calories
                107
                Fat
                0g
                Carbs
                26g
                Protein
                0g
                There are 107 calories in 1 serving of Bob Evans Apple Juice (Kids)”
                Amount of carbs from sugar 26Gms.

            2. Kwashiorkor occurs on high sugar, monotonously low-protein plant-based based diets. Such as maize gruel. Often when the mother weans the child with the arrival of a new baby. Treatment involves weaning onto sweet milk, perhaps with added lactase, mineral salts and vitamins. Ready to use supplements incorporate peanut butter, milk powder, sugar, vegetable oil, with added vitamins and minerals.After several weeks milk can be optionally replaced by mineral/vitamin enhanced boiled cereals. It can be avoided if the child has access to adequate bovine milk at weaning time.

              ‘Malnourished children in the 1-2 year age group had the highest case fatality rate (18.7%). This age group is within the traditional weaning age in Nigeria.
              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6437030

              1. Pete talking Kwashiorkor…. it does not present with the invariable occasion of a second child in Africa. It occurs in conditions of starvation… the mother and child are typically starving. It presents yes as protein deficiency and is treated with that as primary focus.

                From a landmark study on this from the fifties you are probably familiar with…

                “The mixtures will be arranged so that as far as possible the deficiencies of one food are made up by the richness of another. For instance, in a mixture of soya and maize-a mixture that we used in Germany and have also used at Mulago-soya supplies plenty of lysine, which the maize lacks, and the maize supplies methionine, which the soya lacks. If yet more methionine is needed, some sunflower can be added. We have already done enough controlled experimental work with large groups of children of various ages to show that the principle of mutual supplementation is sound. It will never produce from plant materials quite such a perfect mixture of amino-acids as is found in the animal proteins, but we believe that the children will not notice the difference.”
                Cows Milk derivitive is considered in this study the easiest way to get the protein, but it may be accomplished by plant as well.

                The question then as it is now, is how to get enough protein to the children which are so afflicted, which then was most easily accomplished by dairy source but as mentioned in my quote was also accomplished by other plant foods source.

                It is divergent from the issue in that more infants are dying from the utilization of formula in any form rather than breast milk, when breast milk is available.
                If you are tying to infer dairy is a necessity to prevent the starvation which causes this…no that is just not true. Dairy is not present in many populations. Here in the southwest America, most conspicuously and no dairy existed in this part of the world prior to the advent of the European invasion. And there is no evidence of this disease being present in the populations at that earlier date.

                AS to how to treat existant conditions of famine. Bill Gates and many others think it must be done with dairy. A large group is also found to the inverse suggesting that the African continent simply is no longer suitable for dairy in the amounts necessary and the effect of that on global warming will overrule the anticipated benefit.

                So pick your poison I guess. Famine in Africa is a big big problem presently it presents as a result in Yemen and it is about all a political result not a foodsupply result.

                1. Ron, we are probably splitting hairs. I am sure there are multiple causes of the condition. But it can be accentuated when baby is weaned onto low quality gruel with the arrival of a new infant. More so if it coincides with famine/parental starvation. Dairy is an ideal solution to this problem, and in Africa that is more likely to consist of a family cow – if the family can afford it. Alternatively establishing conventional dairy farming (doubt Africa is suitable) or subsidised milk from the west.
                  Dairying comes at an environmental cost. Whether it is more or less than the environmental footprint of alternatives is endlessly debatable.
                  Africa, China and India have huge, growing populations. There is a huge environmental cost to feeding and housing them. Not the least of which is the growing shortage of water, esp. during a period of climate change.
                  There is increased pressure for dairy farming to be confined to areas with adequate year-round rainfall, and warmer winters. This allows pasture to grow all year round. Ideally, dairy would be restricted to those particular areas. This would exclude areas where it snows in winter, which is a large slab of the US. But politically, it is most unlikely to happen. Moreover, it does not overcome the methane issue – which is a further environmental negative to dairying.

                  1. Well no The cause is certain…. starvation. The particular to that presentation is protein but protein abstracted, these children are effectively starving to death.

                    If this is accepted and virtually all the literature accepts that, lack of food it the root problem. What are the chances that a family would have the resources to have a family cow for dairy…virtually none. They would kill and eat the cow and likely be safe from starvation for a little bit. It is not a question of food choice as preference, as cause. That preference is but a minor cause the majority cause is always a simple lack of food. I have mentioned the Americas but places with lactose intolerant peoples, (virtually all native americans are ) speaks of a people who did not have this occurance as long as other foods were available. They did not have this problem in other than very rare famine situations. It is simply not findable in anthropological study, lore, nor historical narrative from the first explorers. In native American history, their history not ours, it simply is never ever mentioned.

                    Which was the problem acknowledged in the landmark study and why they tried various plant provisions….how to provide food. Dairy is preferable they state, but it simply is not possible in many of these areas.This was 1950’s mind you when the thought of vegetarianism was simply absurd in the west. They came to altenatives as they were necessary.
                    Is it compounded by a singular plant based diet…..well in enhances the tendency, but the children are still starving to death.Certainly if food was provided it would solve the problem completely. Yes dairy solves it best, it is after all a optimal carrier for calories and protein but other foods may as well though less optimally.
                    The less optimal choice in Africa, is, as WHO attests in statement of position, now a necessity. If the third world adopts our diet it will erode likely our carbon remediation in other areas. In the end Africa, those parts of it most suffering threat of famine, are the same places which will have most effect from global warming presenting as drought and higher temperatures on average.
                    And this is where the population of the world is likely at fastest increase..

                    So we find them treat them…yes dairy in Yemen likely when things resolve that will be the approach. But family cows will not solve the African problem in this day and age.
                    You are not alone in this, as I mention, Bill Gates this is his scheme with his charity. Meat dairy for all the third world. But it seems not workable and in the immediate it will contribute to global warming with C02 and methane as you correctly mention a contributor.

                    1. This is but one study….https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-014-1169-1
                      focusing on the UK. But the world at large through WHO, has studied multiples of this and come to the conclusion animal based products bestowed upon AFrica and like places, will be a significant net gain in carbon production. Hence they have advocated for plant based diets with animal sourced items as only minor.
                      This is about as clear and unequivocal as human cause climate change itself. I know you may verse if so inclined, various and sundry studies about sustainable agriculture includeing dairy as part.
                      And they are factually true. In isolated instances they are the best source of available calories in places generally where other human foods cannot grow.
                      But they are simply not adaptable to Africa and most of the third world due to environmental degredation of present and population increase.

                      They will remain a part of the caloric intake of the peoples there presently. But the addition of large numbers of populations of others…ti simply cannot work. Gates and his foundation are working to this aim through genetic engineering of food crops for animal consumption. But I think they will be doomed to failure and their efforts would be greatly enhanced by applying the technology in whole to increasing food protein availability in crops for humans. Protein content in plants may be enhanced by GMO technology.

                      But he is set in his tact and it is a focus but not a major one. He wants to provide animal products to all. It will doom us whether the things are grown here and exported, or if they are grown there with significant environmental remediation to enable that..

                      I think him insane in this but it is a personal view. The world does not by concensus agree with him in this. WHO expresses current thinking globally.

                      And to add we knew this a bit back in the fifties as that study attests. They looked at soy/sunflower alternative for the infant disease, not because it worked better, it works worse, but as they knew they had to. Back then we were looking at things with the unrealistic assumption we could indeed solve all the worlds problems, a notion now devolved.

          1. I am not challenging your assertations on oats. They are correct.
            The question was however within the context of removal of the benefits of tea from the addition of oat based milks….nothing suggests such will occur.
            One may add any of the plant milks with the possible exception of soy as mentioned in the video. Nothing suggests the other plant milks will hinder that.

            You have contended dairy will not as well, but that is separate from the question this reader is asking.

  18. Thanks Ron,

    Yes, I understand the breastfeeding is important data.

    I ended up going back to Dr Gregers videos and he has Casein and Type 1 Disbetes risk and Bovine Insulin and Type 1 Diabetes and Bovine Leukemia and Breast Cancer. 37% of Breast Cancer could be caused by Bovine Leukemia viruse, which was found in 100% of the milk from big farms who supply the most milk. Medium farms it was 90-something percent and small farms was slightly less Bovine Leukemia Virus, but Pete people who work with cattle get Cancer at a higher rate than average Americans. I am on my cell phone and couldn’t read the text enough to know how much extra Cancer, but being a woman whose mother died from Breast Cancer, that one is a biggie.

    The Bovine Insulin one and Type 1 Diabetes was too complicated for me. I have to watch it again.

    The thing is, viruses in milk would be one avenue and the antibodies to the milk proteins would be a second avenue and animal products changing gut microbiome might be a third avenue.

    That one was the A-2 cows from Iceland weren’t related to Type 1 Diabetes.

    I have to see if there is an updated video in that.

    1. Anything other than breast milk for a infant is a negative, be it dairy based plant based or whatever. When a child is weaning the mother must introduce dietary items which are nutritionally sound. Apple juice, things like that, are other than providing hydration which is necessary, not really nutritionally sound. A bit is Ok depending on the age of the child, but nothing suggests that little is better served by apple juice than any of the plant milks. It is commonly given but little serves to recommend it.

  19. Pete could you watch the bovine insulin and Type 1 Diabetes one and talk about it.

    I have to find out whether following kids to 11 was long enough.

  20. Casomorphines being associated with autism would be another topic.

    Babies having very leaky gut and the Casomorphibes make it into the brain.

    That one, I think is a theory, which is being tested.

  21. Pete,

    Does the people who work with cattle getting more Cancer affect your thoughts? Or having so much Bovine Leukemia Vitus bring in so many animals and do much milk?

    My friend moved out of State and bought a farm to do grass fed animals without antibiotics and I don’t know how they deal with viruses? Does doing it without antibiotics mean they have fewer or more viruses? I wonder?

    I am trying to understand what your confidence is in?

    I have a growing list to research between the autism and schizophrenia and different cancets and endothelials.

    I am not trying to be difficult, I am genuinely trying to figure out the Bovine insulin and Type 1 Diabetes thing and are you thinking that Breast feeding for two months was sufficient and the bovine viruses and bovine antibodies which they found in the people with Type 1 Diabetes doesn’t matter because they have kids where it didn’t correlate after 2 months Breastfeeding?

    I am thinking that causes you to throw out the rest of the studies and I am not sure it is strong enough to throw out the antibodies being present in the Type 1 Diabetics plus the Finnish Study where there was a difference up to 90-something percent with milk drinking places versus not, except Iceland who has a different type of cow.
    I think I just feel like that study you are looking at needs to be duplicated, because of the Autism risk and Schizophrenia risk.

  22. I was just looking up the changes in the gut microbiome and 1 in 50 infants get allergies probably related to the change in ratio of the bad bacteria to the good bacteria.

    I can’t possibly remember how to spell the words right now and my autocorrect is not familiar with them either.

  23. Having most of our milks testing positive for viruses in the USA might be why some of the conditions happen, so you might be getting rid of some of the risk by not buying the milk most people buy.

    I do have voncerns about the plant milks with oil and sweetners.

    Not sure they are all that good either.

  24. I looked at the glowing review meta-analysis and they didn’t include the negative studies and most of the people were dairy. I would have liked to see them include the information covered on this site at least in there someplace, but reading that I know that thry recommend semi skim milk and fermented dairy a few times in it and they might be using studies which have that bent.

    1. I think that it not mentioning any of the things makes it not useful to me.

      If it mentioned them and put them in context I would be able to reconcile the two sides of the argument.

      1. For instance the Breast cancer patients testing positive for Bovine Leukemia at such a high level but they just say there is no association between Breast cancer and milk and don’t mention the 37% who tested positive to the Bovine Leukemia Virus.

        It makes it impossible to process the information. I can’t possible get closer to an answer because they ignored those things rather than put them in context. That is disappointing to me, the same way you are disappointed wanting Dr Greger to be more positive on the subject.

        If they had included these things it might be easier but they didn’t and that makes it nearly impossible to reconcile.

        1. Another would be the saturated fats and Type 2 Diabetes. I got rid of my Diabetes symptoms going off of saturated fats. I do know that my friends are trying to do it Keto and are drinking heavy cream, but my symptoms are gone and theirs is not managed even with multiple meds.

          I have seen a TED talk where a woman Dr got patients off insulin by going high enough fat, but I have also seen the all-cause mortality studies where low carb diets increase heart attacks and strokes by 50% and 51% and Cancer by 35%.

          All-cause mortality is another where one group says there is an increase and another group says there is a decrease and they didn’t discuss why they chose the side which makes milk look good enough for me to know if yogurt and fermented milk is why or did they just throw Swedens large study out.

          When the bovine and type 1 Diabetes study was examined Dr Greger talked about Iceland and the paradox and the different caseine, he didn’t just throw Iceland out and I don’t like that they threw Sweden and Finland out.

          1. If they had said:

            In America, they have a problem with Bovine Leukemia Virus being in 100% of the milks of the big milk companies, but…..

            Followed by their rationale, it would have helped me know how to put things in perspective

            1. I feel like them saying they are reviewing the total of all of the research while not mentioning most of the things I was looking for just made it too hard. Sorry.

              I will stick with the process, but I think it will take a more thorough person analyzing the data in a way I can really process.

              For me, I didn’t get rid of the symptoms I had until I went off saturated fats and I never lost weight with milk and I drank a ton of it, but also had a horrible diet, but a year before getting rid of milk and cheese, I got rid of bread and pasta and flour and potatoes and every grain and sugar and all desserts and all snacks and that approach did nothing at all. I didn’t lise weight and I didn’t get rid of my horizontal nail ridges or eye or Brain problems. Getting rid of saturated fats worked much better for me.

              1. Yes, I got yo Grain Brain before coming here and would have thought it was my problem if it worked.

                I genuinely tried taking coconut oil and all sorts of things, but my brain is slowly improving getting rid of oil, milk and cheese.

              2. Looks like Deb did another all-nighter. :-(

                Deb, I don’t know what part of the country you live in, but your last post was at quarter to 7 a.m. EST. Good lord, girl, I feel sooooooo sorry for your tired mind! How do you slog through the daylight/working hours?

                No offense intended (as dear ron would say), but methinks maybe you think too much! :-)

  25. YR,

    I couldn’t sleep at all tonight.

    I had fallen aslleep at 4 in the morning for years. Trying to fix it, I moved it to 7, and now 9 or 10 maybe.

    I wonder if I don’t sleep at all if I will reset.

      1. YR,

        Is that learning in my sleep type of sleep education or is there a college for learning how to get to sleep? That is the question running through my mind.

        1. Deb, if you go to one of these places they will merely test you; there’s nothing you have to “learn” as far as taking classes, although I’m not really sure. I think you sleep at their clinic through the night, and agree to be filmed. Maybe you’re to wear something on your head so they can get a better idea of what’s going on with your brain, etc.

          I’m wondering if you have nightmares during the night, and subconsciously try to avoid hitting the sack for that reason. There was a time in my life, many years ago, when I was afraid to go to sleep; I had some weird our-of-body experiences/astral projections that, at first, used to scare me. Kept a journal. Long story. Anyway:

          http://www.sleepeducation.org/essentials-in-sleep/insomnia

  26. Pete,

    I have processed that I have to go through all of the studies in that Meta-Analysis and that it may take me all the way until the next time milk comes up as a topic to figure it all out, but, next time, I will be ready to discuss things properly.

    In defense of Dr. Greger, he has said positive things about fermented dairy like yogurt. I remember that. Also, I don’t know how he could do the process, which you want from him. I do believe that his researchers are doing a sincere process, and that they would have gone through all of the studies in the Meta-Analysis to look for industry bias and design of the studies and gold standard studies and P Values and things like that, but is Dr. Greger’s job to expose that most of the milk in America has Bovine Leukemia Virus and that 37% of women with Breast Cancer test positive for it and that they expect those numbers to rise because Mammograms aren’t strong enough to find Cancer until it becomes a big deal or is he then, supposed to just say, “Well, those details are true, but this Meta-Analysis from Copenhagen says, that it isn’t linked to Breast Cancer, just Prostate Cancer, so women, go ahead and drink as much milk as you want.”

    I am not trying to be sarcastic, but some of us grew up drinking about 64 ounces of milk per day or something like that. A few big glasses of it with meals and 80% more milk with a hint of coffee, plus icecream many nights of the week. My mother believed the commercials and we went through gallons of milk per day. I always liked milk. She died of Breast Cancer at 53.

    Anyway, I don’t think Dr. Greger can do the white-washed version of milk unless he dots each “i” and crosses each “t” and I don’t think the science has dealt with his issues yet and they got rid of those issues and did a Mary Poppins version.

    1. I am laughing because I just looked at the 16 ounce water glass in front of me and I have to confess that I just underestimated my previous milk intake by so much that I maybe understand why I didn’t lose any weight until I went off of it.

      Two 16 ounce glasses with meals, plus, a few XL Dunkin Donuts Iced Coffee’s, which were 80 to 90% milk. Plus, I was doing casseroles with milk in it. Let’s see, the meal milk was 96 ounces. The iced coffee milk was probably just as much.

    2. Deb said: In defense of Dr. Greger, he has said positive things about fermented dairy like yogurt.
      ____________________________________________________________
      This recents study seems to confirm that.

      https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-10/uoef-fdp103018.php

      Personally I do not think there is a conflict between the no-milk/yes-milk schools of thought. I simply believe there is a timeline difference.

      That is, I think drinking milk is advantageous to a growing child, but once growth has stopped I think it best to curtail the consumption of milk to avoid continuing “growth.”

      1. Logically, I think you are quite right Lonie. But it does not seem to show up in the vast majority of studies. Dairy consumption appears to reduce the incidence of bowel and breast cancer, and reduce the risk of metabolic syndrome/cardiovascular disease. There is a small link with prostate cancer, but that also occurs in high-calcium vegetarian diets. If eg the growth hormones in milk were a problem you would expect it to show up somewhere, but it does not seem to. .

        1. Pete, I’m basing my conclusions on one single thing and that is that, from what I’ve read here at least, milk (and meat) is an activator of IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor – 1, and things I’ve read in the past suggest a pathway that can lead to cancer and other illness IIRC.

          There is no way I am gonna deep-dive into the research as you and some others do, (if I did I would never get anything done ‘-) but saw this first coming from Valter Longo and have accepted it ever since.

          I do remember reading somewhere that walnuts and walnut oil could suppress IGF-1. Some argue that we need IGF-1 to heal wounds, but I’m thinking that is just intuitive thinking rather than settled fact. But even if it is true children would need this more than an adult because as a rule children are more likely to get “ouwies” than less reckless adults.

          I would just close with this thought. In first world countries at least, nutrition availability is not a problem… choice is the problem… so drinking milk is not a health necessity anymore.

          I do occasionally continue drinking a product with milk products in the list and sometimes a small bowl of ice cream. I’m pretty well convinced I get well into the 90th percentile of my countrymen and women of nutrition and fully believe I can overcome any potential harmful effect of consuming even such a small of milk products, so I feel comfortable doing so.

          I don’t do it for any nutritional benefit… just for convenience or consuming a “pleasurable.”

          Lonie 69 years and 57 months… aka “Pup.”

            1. I will reply on the weekend Lonie. Cheers
              _______________________________________

              If your post was meant to cause me anxiety, you’ve succeeded.

              Having that large a window to deep dive in research covering the entire Internet means I can expect to get hammered with those facts unmercifully and will probably be reduced to a gelatinous mass by cow hoof keratin.

              I may become a Deb 20, unable to sleep for days just from the dreaded uncertainty… :-(

              1. Ha ha Lonie. I just dont have time at present. It might take longer than this weekend. Its not such much I want to win the debate, and understand better myself. In theory, growth hormones in milk may be good for children – in some respects at least, and both good and bad in adults. There are those adults who are administered growth hormones to extend their lives, and stay youthful. But personally, I would not mess around with that stuff.

        1. LOL, yeah YR, I have a lot of science to learn before I can possibly understand things like milk.

          I think the emotion comes because Pete is right that there is a glowing, “nothing at all to worry about, drink all the milk you want” type of Meta-Analysis and that would have caused such deep mental confusion within me and would have caused me to think I was losing my mind 2 years ago and every single topic is like this.

          Somehow, in life, people who didn’t go to medical school have to figure out how to eat and drink and I do know people who have gone “meat only” and they have science backing them up, too, and I went and listened to them after the Very-Pro-Milk-Meta-Analysis and I ended up watching water fasting and Cancer after that and found a man who healed his dog of beginning stage Hemangiosarcoma with a 20 day water fast.

          Tried to figure out the difference between a 20 day fast and Cachexia.

          Fasting has complex research, too.

          Under 13 hours, according to one person is when Breast Cancer is more likely to come back. Another guy said that 12 hours is ideal and that over that you end up needing your gall bladder removed and that if you skip breakfast the all-cause mortality goes up. Versus other people who swear by one meal per day.

          It is the battle of the internet experts on every single topic.

          I can say that I know now that the answers are probably so complex that people really need to basically get a medical school education on the internet to figure out which people to listen to.

          I am comfortable with WFPB, but I will say that my friends and relatives can’t do it and they are all talking with me about what they can do and I am sincerely doing my best to hear things from every research perspective.

          It used to topple me.

          Now, I just calmly don’t understand it.

          1. I had song lyrics go through my head, which I modified slightly dedicate to this culture and all these topics:

            “Someone call the doctor
            Got a case of a (nutrition) bi-polar
            Stuck on an internet roller coaster
            Can’t get off this ride
            You change your mind
            Like a girl changes clothes
            ‘Cause you’re hot then you’re cold
            You’re yes then you’re no
            You’re in then you’re out
            You’re up then you’re down
            You’re wrong when it’s right
            It’s black and it’s white
            We learn one thing, we break up
            We learn the other, we make up”

          2. Interesting, but I had wondered if you’d read my question to you about a totally different topic: nightmares, insomnia and such.

            However, I see your mind has moved on to something else…as it often does. :-)

            1. LOL!

              Yes, people who don’t sleep need a sense of humor or they get cranky.

              Technically, there is such a thing as waking dreams, but I haven’t gone to sleep college yet.

              1. What I am going to say is that the lack of sleep doesn’t bother me as much as the feeling insane with every topic in the universe being presented in a multi-polar manner.

                You couldn’t possibly understand that politics, nutrition, social culture and it spilled into how the leaders of the churches I went to presented Christianity.

                I really didn’t “get” that it was happening for a very long time.

                I probably did “get” that I would hear “Milk is linked to an increase in all-cause mortality” Then, the next week, I would hear, “Milk is linked to a decrease in all-cause mortality” and I “got” that I was so confused and that my brain couldn’t process anything.

                I genuinely had a mental breakdown trying to follow all of the logic back and forth and up and down. It wasn’t until about 6 months before coming here that I could finally understand, “It isn’t me. It is them doing a ridiculous process.” That was when I could finally gain some control over it, rather than having it destroy me.

                Somehow, professionals learned to do it that multi-polarizing way and I didn’t learn to do it that way and it was like Kryptonite to me.

                It is so much better now that I am researching everything.

                I just started so far behind in my understanding that it is taking quite a while to catch up.

                1. Having Christianity change from Billy Graham to Franklin Graham would be just one of the ten zillion polar opposite shifts.

                  Politics is too easy to see the compass spinning round and round and round.

                  On top of that, and maybe because of all of the opposing data, I genuinely came to not trust doctors or psychiatry or the news or the government or anyone with power and money.

                  And that was already fairly true in the sixties and seventies and eighties and nineties, but I find little safer niches to explore from and this site is one.

                  1. I started to think to myself

                    How bad has it gotten that I don’t even trust the food supply?

                    But nowadays I change it to

                    How bad has it gotten that I can’t even trust the food supply?

                    1. I was happy in churches plural for so long and now I find myself being as far removed as if I went WFPB and they went All-meat and it was leadership that did it and I still don’t even get how this all happened, but it has.

                    1. LOL!

                      Yes, for most things, we don’t have to be in the cross-fire.

                      But we have an aggressive, authoritative process who is particularly aiming at the people who aren’t on a side and I am finally understanding that if you are the one who all of the politicians from both parties show up at your house, it is because they don’t understand that Switzerland wanted to be neutral.

  27. It is Humpty Dumpty with a great big bunch of billionaire interest groups trying to pull the culture into pieces.

    It is: intermittent fasting helps Diabetes and causes Diabetes. It decreases all-cause mortality if you hit it on the exact hour of space between eating and fasting, but if you skip breakfast you are going to die fastest of all and if you eat one meal per day you are going to need your gall bladder removed.

    And the green tea extract helps and kills you faster and some of it is the whole choryfil real confusion and some of it is a marketing masterpiece and some of it is people exploiting the fact that even 90% of doctors don’t know statistics or nutrition.

    The thing is, within families and friendships, things which used to pull people together now separate them just as often.

    This relative loves that relatives politics on pot but they hate each other about abortion and can’t stand each other about race and can’t eat each other’s diet. Switzerland is being invaded left and right because none of them understood the purpose of putting peaceful, healthy relationships over all of these other things.

    More and more people are breaking relationships not based on what people said or did, but what they stand for

    The Humpty Dumpty writer understood it way back then.

    1. Wow, yes, that would be an interesting class.

      Yes, interesting times. Probably similar to the interesting times throughout history, but sped up somehow.

      Psychologically, it is interesting because it is so fragmented and we are past being able to generate outrage or compassion for almost any of it.

      When I was in college, in Psychology, I think it was a Psychology class, we read Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Electric Koolaid Acid Test and studied acid trips and things like that. It was culturally relevant to the times.

      In church, it was David Wilkerson’s The Cross and the Switchblade with emphasis gangs and heroin with David Wilkerson heading to NY City to set the heroin addicts and gang members free. One of the pastors I used to love was one of the drug addicts who got set free with Teen Challenge. He passed away a few years ago, but he was one of my favorite pastors. Got his life cleaned up, reached out to the addicts, never backslid, and never became proud about any of it.

      I watched a documentary on drug addiction and there are drugs that kill people if they even touch them and others which kill them in about 2 years from their first use and rot their flesh off so that the bone is what is visible. It is so tragic.

      Hate is aimed at the wrong things. We should hate the drugs and hate the mental illness and love the people. I guess maybe classes like that is how you start that process.

  28. YR,

    Has it changed?

    That is what I don’t know.

    I can go back through time and think of dictators murdering people and enslaving people and torturing them. Doing all sorts of perverse things with them.

    It is definitely experienced with more immediacy and that has changed it, but there is also so much more distraction. A school shooting lasts a few weeks in the public conscience. There are so many serial killers and spree killers now that most people couldn’t name them or count them.

    But thinking about Apartheid and Jim Crowe and watching Mississippi Burning, and seeing the Lynching Museum and having done many trips to the Holocaust museums, thinking about Russian persecution of religion and Cambodia Killing Fields and North Korea and going back through time and I feel like singing, “We Didn’t Start the Fire” by Billy Joel.

    Some things changed is the miracle.

  29. Seemingly negative effects of soy milk on tea goodies raises the question of whether putting soy milk on morning whole grain cereal, walnuts and berries negates their benefits too. Any information on this?

        1. Just sayin’ that if soy milk has a negative effect on tea it does not follow that it also has a negative effect on grains, walnuts and berries as they are unrelated to tea other than being a natural plant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This