Image Credit: Pixabay. These images have been modified.

Cow Cancer Virus Implicated in Breast Cancer

Up to 20 percent of all cancers in general are linked to infections, particularly viruses, and the list of potentially carcinogenic infectious agents is growing. It would be great if we could find a virus that contributed to breast cancer risk, because then we might have new ways to prevent and treat it. Currently, the dietary link between breast cancer and consumption of meat and dairy is considered a saturated fat effect, but there is a cancer-causing bovine virus that infects the mammary gland cells of cows. The infectious virus is then released into the milk supply. Since most U.S. dairy herds are infected, scientists posit that Americans are often exposed to this bovine leukemia virus (BLV), which I discuss in my video The Role of Bovine Leukemia Virus in Breast Cancer.

We didn’t have proof of this until 2003, 34 years after the virus was first identified. Early on, our best available tests failed to find antibodies to BLV in human blood. When our immune system is exposed to a virus, it creates antibodies to attack it. No antibodies, no exposure. “This led to the prevailing opinion that…the virus is not a public health hazard.” Though those tests “were state of the art at that time, they are extremely insensitive compared to more modern techniques.” As a result, researchers decided to re-examine the issue now that we have better tests. They took blood from about 250 people simply to address the question: “Do any humans have antibodies to BLV?” The answer? Yes, 191 of them did––74 percent. That shouldn’t have come as a surprise, however: By then, nearly 90 percent of American dairy herds were infected, and, according to the latest national survey, 100 percent of the big factory dairy farms were infected, as determined by testing the milk coming from those operations. Given this, why isn’t there an epidemic of cancer of the udder? Dairy cattle are slaughtered so young that there isn’t a lot of time for them to develop gross tumors, but that’s how most women may be getting infected. Although pasteurization should knock out the virus, who hasn’t eaten a rare, pink-in-the-middle burger at some point?

The bottom line is that the “long-held assumption that BLV is not a public health hazard…is no longer tenable…” This whole field of investigation needs to be reopened, with the next step determining whether humans are actually infected. “The presence of antibodies to particular viruses in human sera is generally interpreted as an indicator of a present or past infection with the virus.” But, theoretically, we might have developed antibodies to the dead viruses we ate, viruses that had been killed by cooking or pasteurization. Just because three-quarters of us have been exposed doesn’t mean we were actively infected by the virus.

How do we prove this? We would need to find the retrovirus actively stitched into our own DNA. Well, millions of women have had breast surgery, so why not just look at the tissue? Researchers finally did just that and published their findings in the Centers for Disease Control and Protection’s emerging infectious diseases journal: Forty-four percent of samples tested positive for BLV, proving for the first time that humans can be infected with bovine leukemia virus. The final step? Determine whether the virus is actually contributing to disease. In other words, are the bovine leukemia viruses we’re finding in human breast tissue cancer-causing or just “harmless passengers”?

One way to make that determination is to see whether the virus is more often present in those with breast cancer. No one had ever looked for the virus in breast tissue from people with cancer…until now. The “[p]resence of BLV-DNA in breast tissues was strongly associated with diagnosed and histologically confirmed breast cancer…” As many as 37 percent of human breast cancer cases may be attributable to exposure to bovine leukemia virus.


For some historical background leading up to these shocking findings, see my video Is Bovine Leukemia Virus in Milk Infectious?.

I couldn’t wait to read the meat and dairy industry journals to see how they’d try to spin this. Find out what I discovered in my final video in this series Industry Response to Bovine Leukemia Virus in Breast Cancer.

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.


102 responses to “Cow Cancer Virus Implicated in Breast Cancer

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. Hmmm, this is concerning. As a former meat and dairy eater (WFPB vegan now), I am worried about prior exposure to this pathogen. Is there a way for us to get tested for this through our general physicians?

    1. The lab tests are only advertised on-line for testing animals.

      You can ask your doctor, but recently, I have been hearing doctors have said, “I don’t even know how to order a test for that.”

      Usually, after they said that, the internet can help, but, in this case, I could only find ones for cows and many of those the tests would only ship outside the USA.

    2. I’m sure there is an expensive and painful test. However, as you live WFPB, you are preventing mutated cells from many many causes from becoming tumors.

      You and I both can sleep well tonight.

      1. Thanks Pat. I do hope my years of WFPB will make up for my years of being fed/eating so much meat and dairy. I was raised by a mother from the mid-west so I have a lot of former childhood exposure. I remember years ago a friend telling me that their vegetarian friend died from breast cancer, now I’m wondering if it wasn’t from BLV and all of the dairy that vegetarians eat to try to max their protein intake! If only more people knew all the benefits of WFPB, how many lives could be extended?

  2. Rhetorical Q:
    “Although pasteurization should knock out the virus, who hasn’t eaten a rare, pink-in-the-middle burger at some point?”

    Concrete A:
    I’ve never eaten a burger in my entire life.
    Believe it or not….

    1. Pasteurization will knock out most bacteria, not all, there are almost certainly any number of viruses that will remain viable after that brief heating.

      I think the real issue now is to somehow differentiate the risk caused by the saturated dairy fat from that caused by the virus(es).

      1. However, a meta-analysis of 14 cohort studies showed that women who were in the highest levels of total fat intake had 13% higher risk of breast cancer. Other studies showed no statistically significant difference.

        They said that it is hard to do a study because when women stop eating fat, they also change so many other things, phytonutrients, fiber, calories, etc. That makes it harder to know how much of it is fat intake versus something else, but either way, it isn’t high enough to explain away the potential virus effect.

        1. I was interested that they showed a link between high-fat dairy and higher BMI.

          I always liked dairy and always ate a lot of it, but probably increased it more after they did the lowering waist line study.

          It definitely contributed to my obesity more than anything, plus it gave me diabetes symptoms and I know because it wasn’t until I went off dairy dairy until it went away.

      2. Then there’s people consuming raw (non pasteurized) dairy. And what of people’s own cows. I wonder if they often have the virus

        Reading this blog, thought if eating that stuff, made me queasy

      3. There is a lot of evidence from large epidemiological studies that eating dairy significantly reduces the chances of dying from all causes including cardiovascular disease. Google the Golestan Study (40,000 participants), the PURE Study, (5 continent, 21 country dairy study 136,000 participants) and the Physicians and Nurses Health Studies (more than 200,000 participants).
        I stopped eating dairy for a long time, because I believed on the basis of scant evidence that dairy was harmful. Now I have gone back to eating cheese and yogurt. See my comment below for more details.

        1. Epidemiological and other observational studies are notoriously vulnerable to being confounded by uncontrolled variables

          in the case of dairy consumption, controlling for replacemnt nutrients is a key challenge. In other words, what did people consuming dairy,eat less of and what did peope not consuming dairy eat more of? If it was meat products and/or refined carbohydrates, then it is unsurprising that dairy appeared relatively healthy.

          However, as Harvard has reported:

          “For dairy lovers, the good news is that various foods including full-fat dairy milk, yogurt, butter, cheeses, and cream were not found to increase heart disease risk (compared to a background diet that typically contains high amounts of refined carbohydrates and sugars). However, it is important to note that these foods were not found to decrease risk either.

          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/

          I’ll continue to avoid dairy and stick with whole grains.

          1. Mr. Fumblefingers- Do as you wish. The statement you quoted from Harvard was from 2016, before two studies were published showing reduced death from all causes from eating dairy and in the case of the Golestan Study, a large decrease in reduced death from cardiovascular disease. The Golestan Study had impeccable funding- the National Cancer Institute and NIH. The former study was a Harvard study, the latter Harvard had an important role in, since Dr. Willetts was involved in the study. Eating dairy, especially fermented dairy like cheese and yogurt and eating whole grains are not mutually exclusive. I eat some of both and am very thin. Fat is satiating.

        2. The PURE study, although funded by the WHO, was perhaps deliberately designed to produce the results it did.

          The research team at McMaster University that led the investigation, was headed by several prominent saturated fat and sodium apologists. McMaster University was described by the Canadian Dairy Farmers website as a its ‘partner’, presumably reflecting the amount of funding the Canadian dairy industry has given it for .research’. Unfortunately that web page has now been taken down. Perhaps coincidentally, dairy products are high in saturated fat and sodium.

          https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/diet-health-puzzling-past-paradox-pure-understanding-david?trk=mp-reader-card

          1. Mr. Fumblefingers- even in 2016, before the Golestan Study was published and the Physicians and Nurses Studies data was published, Harvard was saying that there was no increase in heart disease risk. Now we have data from two reliable sources pointing to lower all cause and cvd mortality. And most intriguing, the Golestan Study found that the top quintile of dairy eaters saw the greatest benefits. New ballgame.

            1. I would add that Harvard played a prominent role in the Golestan Study and was responsible for harvesting the data in the Physicians and Nurses Studies.

        3. Alan,

          When Finland switched to high dairy, they started having an epidemic of people dying young of heart disease and that risk dropped by 84% when they got rid of the dairy fat.

          They also became #1 in the whole world in Alzheimer’s and there was a recent study where they decreased the risk of getting Alzheimer’s by 90% if the people switched to closer to WFPB by the age of 50.

          Anyway, it might depend on cheese versus skim milk, but the improvements were so great that I don’t even need to think about it.

          1. I don’t think Finland ever switched to dairy. That didn’t happen at all. They were also heavy smokers. Even Harvard according to the quote above said in 2016 that dairy doesn’t increase mortality.

            1. They did examine the smoking of the males in that part of Finland back then comparing it to America, which smoked more than they did and to a part of China, which smoked even more.

              The article I read said that they had switched from other farming to dairy before the intervention.

              I don’t have time to find that article, but Pritikin’s site has one from a doctor who was part of getting them to lower their fats, and the changes did help considerably.

  3. Until 8 years my wife and I ate a boatload of cheese. Now WFPB and SOS free, hopefully any cancer is being held in check. Can’t worry about it at this point but will not go back to the old ways for sure.

      1. That’s true, but major studies are indicating that there never was anything to worry about. Consider the following.

        Major studies show that eating dairy significantly reduces all cause and cardiovascular mortality. Google the Golestan Dairy Intake Study. Reported in the Journal of Epidemiology in 2017. Funded by The National Cancer Institute, the NIH, several universities, including Harvard and an international cancer research org. Not funded by the dairy industry. It followed 42,000 people for 11 years, starting in 2004. Found significant reductions in all cause mortality and a 28% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease from eating dairy. Eating cheese and yogurt saw significant benefits in reduced all cause and cvd mortality. The highest 1/5 of dairy eaters saw the greatest benefits. There was no increase in cancer.
        The PURE Study was reported in the Lancet in Nov. 2018. This was a 5 continent, 21 country dairy study with 136,000 participants. Here is a quote from the study:
        “Dietary guidelines recommend minimising consumption of whole-fat dairy products, as they are a source of saturated fats and presumed to adversely affect blood lipids and increase cardiovascular disease and mortality. Evidence for this contention is sparse and few data for the effects of dairy consumption on health are available from low-income and middle-income countries. Therefore, we aimed to assess the associations between total dairy and specific types of dairy products with mortality and major cardiovascular disease.”
        And: “Dairy consumption was associated with lower risk of mortality and major cardiovascular disease events in a diverse multinational cohort.”

        Harvard, using data from the huge Physicians and Nurses Health Studies with more than 2000,000 participants also found lower all cause mortality from eating dairy.

        1. Alan,

          There are several criticisms of the PURE study; here is one, from a relatively conservative source:

          https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2017/09/08/pure-study-makes-headlines-but-the-conclusions-are-misleading/

          “The takeaway

          Large-scale efforts to study the health effects of diet in developing countries are important, but this study is fraught with methodological problems—especially confounding by different degrees of socio-economical development in different countries and questionable dietary intake data. Dr. Frank Hu, Chair of the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health, notes that one should look beyond the sensational headlines and the abstract of the paper:

          — The main messages for nutritional advice have not changed: follow a healthy dietary pattern that includes abundant amounts of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, and nuts; moderate amounts of reduced-fat dairy products and seafood; and lower amounts of processed and red meat, sugar-sweetened foods and beverages, and refined grains. Such a dietary pattern does not need to limit total fat intake but the main types of fat should be unsaturated fats from plant sources rather than animal fat.” — “

          And another perspective, that looks at the all important funding source:

          https://www.foodpolitics.com/2017/09/the-pure-study-lets-get-skeptical/

          “Why did they do this study?

          I looked immediately to see who paid for it. The list of funders is very long (it must have been extremely expensive). The list begins:

          — The PURE Study is an investigator initiated study funded by the Population Health Research Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, support from CIHR’s Strategy for Patient Oriented Research (SPOR) through the Ontario SPOR Support Unit, as well as the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long­Term Care and through unrestricted grants from several pharmaceutical companies, with major contributions from AstraZeneca (Canada), Sanofi­Aventis (France and Canada), Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany and Canada), Servier, and GlaxoSmithkline, and additional contributions from Novartis and King Pharma and from various national or local organisations in participating countries [the funders that follow are mainly government and private research bodies along with a sugar trade association and more drug companies—the list takes up more than half a column]. —

          Drug companies have a big interest in this topic, especially if dietary approaches to heart disease prevention aren’t proven.”

          1. Can you show me criticism of the 40,000 person Golestan Study? I think it had impeccable funding, led by the NCI, the NIH and Harvard. Dr. Willets of Harvard was involved with this one, maybe even designed it. I haven’t read anything negative about it, though it is possible that I missed something.
            These are not the only studies. There was an Australian study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20372173 A 16 year prospective study with 1529 participants. Found that those with the highest intake of high fat dairy had reduced death compared with those with the lowest intake. Eating high fat dairy was not associated with mortality.

            People have been brainwashed into believing that they are going to get heart disease and die if they eat full fat dairy. Large, long lasting studies suggest that the opposite is true. The studies corroborate each other.

            William Li is a highly respected MD scientist with over 100 papers published in major journals. In his 2019 book, Eat to Beat Disease, though he says that saturated fat is harmful, he recommends eating 2 slices of cheese/day, particularly cheeses like gouda and muenster that are high in Vit. K2, which is supposed to prevent heart disease and calcification of the arteries. He also recommends eating yogurt. Both are beneficial for the gut.

            1. alan, you mention full fat dairy as not associated with increased risk. How is it helpful to not have Increased Risk when the study cites the high rate of hypertension, heart disease and cancer?
              Then why the “Decreased Risk” in those eating the lower fat versions and cheese if saturated fat is healthy? Maybe overall these people are consuming less fat?
              What foods are those lower fat versions and cheese replacing that cause the difference? Are people replacing red meat or processed food with these dairy products? Are these people eating more fruits and vegetables with the dairy?

              I could not find a lot of detail in the study report to answer these questions and others I have.
              Such as exactly what type of dairy is it, for cheese what kind? What kind of milk are these cheeses made of? Some cheeses do have anti-bacterial properties, is that a factor?
              The details matter. This study doesn’t really ‘prove’ anything.

              1. Marilyn- I don’t know what study you are referring to. Your comment is confusing to me. Which study cites a high rate of hypertension, heart disease and cancer? The studies I cited found less death from heart disease and I haven’t seen any reports of cancer or hypertension. I haven’t read that about any study. The Golestan Study was funded first of all by the National Cancer Institute. It didn’t find any increase in cancer.
                I don’t know where you get this from. The Golestan Study didn’t find lower risk in those people eating low fat dairy. It found lower mortality no matter whether low fat dairy was eaten or high fat. Again, I don’t even know which study you are referring to. All of the studies I mentioned found lower mortality from eating dairy. I am not aware that dairy replaced anything. You need to cite the studies you are referring to, otherwise there is no way to know what you are talking about.
                Epidemiological studies don’t prove cause and effect, so you are free to believe whatever you want. Multiple studies with large numbers of participants that agree with each other are very suggestive. As the PURE Study said, there is scant evidence that eating high fat dairy is harmful. That is why these studies are important.

                1. “The Golestan Study didn’t find lower risk in those people eating low fat dairy. It found lower mortality no matter whether low fat dairy was eaten or high fat. ”

                  This is simply not true.
                  ‘High consumption of low-fat dairy food was associated with lower risk of all-cause (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.94; Ptrend = 0.002) and CVD (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.89; Ptrend = 0.001) mortality………………… Higher intake of high-fat dairy food and milk was not associated with all-cause or CVD mortality.’

                  Frankly, I am not surpised that you didn’t provide a link to the Golestan study since it doesn’t support your claim.

                  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5860026/

                  1. My claim is well supported. Eating dairy according to the study significantly reduced all cause and cvd mortality. This was true of cheese which is a high fat dairy food. It says that higher intake of high fat dairy food and milk was not associated with all cause or cvd mortality. What does higher intake mean? I’m not sure. They mention the benefits of cheese which is certainly a high fat dairy food, so yes the benefits came from both low fat and high fat dairy. Even if it was only low fat dairy that produced the benefits, that would be enormously beneficial to health. Here is the abstract:

                    Abstract
                    We investigated the association between dairy product consumption and all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and cancer mortality in the Golestan Cohort Study, a prospective cohort study launched in January 2004 in Golestan Province, northeastern Iran. A total of 42,403 men and women participated in the study and completed a diet questionnaire at enrollment. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. We documented 3,291 deaths (1,467 from CVD and 859 from cancer) during 11 years of follow-up (2004-2015). The highest quintile of total dairy product consumption (versus the lowest) was associated with 19% lower all-cause mortality risk (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72, 0.91; Ptrend = 0.006) and 28% lower CVD mortality risk (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.86; Ptrend = 0.005). High consumption of low-fat dairy food was associated with lower risk of all-cause (HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.94; Ptrend = 0.002) and CVD (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.89; Ptrend = 0.001) mortality. We noted 11% lower all-cause mortality and 16% lower CVD mortality risk with high yogurt intake. Cheese intake was associated with 16% lower all-cause mortality and 26% lower CVD mortality risk. Higher intake of high-fat dairy food and milk was not associated with all-cause or CVD mortality. Neither intake of individual dairy products nor intake of total dairy products was significantly associated with overall cancer mortality. High consumption of dairy products, especially yogurt and cheese, may reduce the risk of overall and CVD mortality.

                  1. Marilyn- this study found no increase in cancer and found reduced deaths from all causes and from cvd. I don’t see any mention of hypertension.

            2. LOL

              The diary industries in the US, Canada and Europe spend an awful lot of money funding reasearch and media releases to brainwash people as you put it.

              As for the Golestan study, it doesn’t support your argument The only people showing an apparent benefit from eating dairy were those eating low fat dairy – which contradicts your assertion that full fat dairy is healthful. Whether they adequately adjusted for food substitution effects is also questionable` In other words, what the people not eating dairy consuming? If it was highly processed foods and refined carbohydrates, then the effect is explainable as a comparison of a less unhealthy food versus a more unhealthy food.

              1. There is still back and forth in that analysis

                Things like the Swedish situation where they did die more, but they said that they had higher dairy intake than some of the ones where dairy, “improved” things.

                While in the Michaëlsson et al. study high milk intake was associated with higher cancer mortality risk in Swedish women but not men, there were no significant associations between cheese or yogurt and cancer mortality risk (20). Lower fatal colorectal cancer risk (27) and higher fatal prostate cancer risk (29) have both been reported in conjunction with high milk consumption.

                1. The article said that it depended on the background diet.

                  And that when wealth was taken away from the equation, some of the results change.

                  In the end though, people do go off dairy as part of WFPB and they do reverse so many diseases in such great numbers. And places like Finland were able to have such large reversals of risk for heart attack and Alzheimer’s going off of high-fat dairy.

                  I guess what I am saying is that going off of it isn’t causing WFPB people to suddenly spring up disease and die younger.

                  I watched PlantPure Nation and people reverse their bad lab results in 10 days without it.

                  1. The places where there was an improvement when down on grains and chicken and those could genuinely be refined grains.

                    The places where they died earlier were higher levels of high-fat dairy. The places where there was an improvement tended to only use smaller levels of dairy overall in comparison to places like Sweden and Finland.

                    1. Plus, milk being a drink, they didn’t keep track of beverages which might have been part of the swap.

                      For instance, if it was used in moderation in something like coffee, swapping for soda or alcohol, for instance.

              2. In Other Words- Show me where it says that the benefits were limited to low fat dairy. It mentions benefits of low fat dairy, but not exclusively so. It just breaks out the data. Here is the conclusion:

                “High consumption of dairy products, especially yogurt and cheese, may reduce the risk of overall and CVD mortality.”

                Do you see anything in this conclusion about low fat dairy?
                And don’t bring up dairy industry funding. This study did not have it.

                1. There are studies which have shown an increase of CVD mortality with high-fat dairy and I just read a sentence that BMI went up with high-fat dairy, but here is a study where CVD mortality went up 32% with high-fat dairy.

                  Overall dairy intake was not associated with CVD mortality or all-cause mortality. Each SD increase in high-fat dairy intake was associated with a 32 % higher risk of CVD mortality (95 % CI; 7-61 %).

                  CONCLUSION:
                  In this prospective cohort study, the intake of high-fat dairy products was associated with an increased risk of CVD mortality.

                  1. There are also studies where going low-fat helped prevent deaths after breast cancer.

                    During 17.7 years of follow-up with 3867 deaths after all cancers, reduction in deaths after breast cancer continued in the dietary intervention group (HR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.99, P = .03).

                    CONCLUSIONS:
                    A low-fat dietary pattern reduced deaths after breast cancer.

                    1. People used to be thin until the war on fat started. Look at film on youtube of people in any period from 1895 on and you will see how thin they are. People started to get fat in the 1990’s when the attack on eating fat got into high gear. When I was growing up, fat people were rare. That was when everyone was eating fat.

                    2. Deb,

                      What study? How can you post this without even mentioning the study? I think it is accepted that eating dairy including high fat dairy does not cause heart disease or death. We don’t eat saturated fat, we eat nutrient dense foods with Vitamins, minerals and probiotics. This makes a difference.

                  2. If you don’t mention the study, you are just wasting people’s time. Who conducted the study? For how long? How many participants? What does SD mean? This is really ridiculous.

                2. Hi, alan! Many studies have been mentioned here, so I am not sure which one is referenced in your question. One potential problem with studies that associate intake of a particular food or food group with disease risk is consideration of what people with low intake of that food are eating instead. If people with low dairy intake are eating a lot of processed red meat instead, for example, that could raise risk for those people.

      1. May I ask what you are talking about?

        Are you responding to Dr. Greger’s blog or to someone posting comments?

        Maybe something like WFPB? Whole Food Plant-Based is a way of eating.

    1. Almond milk, soy milk, any nut or seed milk, rice milk, oat milk……all pretty darn safe. Do they taste the same? No. Will your taste buds adapt to prefer the plant “milks” if you only drink/use them for awhile? Absolutely!
      And it won’t take very long until you prefer them!!!

      1. I agree Geoffrey Levens! I tried a few and found that the organic unsweetened soy milk was great in coffee, almond milk or cashew/coconut milk was fine to use in recipes or splashed on my porridge. No way would I go back to milk.

    2. Julie,

      That is a hard question.

      One of the studies tested 24 cows and 17 were infected.

      Dr. Greger’s other transcript mentions that by 2003, “nearly 90% of American dairy herds were infected. And in the latest national survey, 100% of the big factory farms were infected when you test the milk coming out of those operations.”

    3. JulieO after you adjust to your preferred plant based milks you’ll find your desire for dairy wanes and goes into reverse

      Google videos on the treatment of dairy cattle. Horrendous. It’s hard to ignore or support that :(

    4. Julie Q,

      I like to drink water. I drink my tea and coffee plain — no sweeteners, no milks of any kind. (I started initially as part of an effort to lose weight, practicing portion control, and cutting calories, a few here, a few there — though I never counted calories.)

      Now I make my own soy milk and almond milk at home, from soybeans or almonds and water, nothing else, and I don’t filter them — I like to eat the whole soybean, or the whole almond. (And I don’t like all the additives found in commercial plant milks.). We use them on muesli, granola, or oatmeal in the morning, and for cooking and baking.

      I lost my desire to drink milk a long time ago. I wish it had been even longer.

      1. This is misinformation.
        Cant speak for soy milk, but cows milk does not block polyphenols – other than in a petrie dish.
        The binding that Dr Greger refers to in his video is subsequently broken down in the gut. Which he chooses to ignore. The net effect of adding milk to tea, including green tea, is to increase (not decrease) polyphenol levels (Moser, Xie).

        In 2007, Lorenz et al discovered that milk proteins bind to valuable polyphenols when added to tea. In response to criticism of their methodology, Lorenz et al conceded serious shortcomings in their their study:

        *‘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.

        That is, 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 of 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

        On the evidence, milk enhances the bioavailability of tea polyphenols.

        *EGCG and Tap Water*

        Minerals in tap water also bind EGCG in green tea. By about 50%. In one recent study, when bottled (filtered) water was used instead of tap water, there was no binding of EGCG.

        *…’when steeped in bottled water, the green tea contained about double the amount of the antioxidant epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG)”*

        *‘the normal, everyday minerals in tap water – such as calcium, iron, magnesium, sodium and copper – are the products that result in lower levels of EGCG in green tea’.*

        Robin Dando, Cornell associate professor of food science.

        http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2019/01/green-tea-steeped-bottled-water-increases-antioxidants

        Using milk as an example, EGCG that is bound by tap water may also be ‘unbound’ during digestion.

  4. They sell raw milk at my local health food store. On the fridge door it says “only for animal consumption.” But I’ve seen the store clerk recommend it to mothers for their kids.

    1. Marge,

      Yes, my friend drinks it.

      She also used to drink colloidal silver and I talked to her about turning blue, but it wasn’t until this year when her doctor told her that he had a patient who turned blue that she stopped that.

      The internet recommends all sorts of crazy things and people don’t know how to figure out which ones to listen to.

    1. That is a great question. I think all cheese is fermented. It’s made from starter cultures. You might find the following interesting. Some cheeses are rich in Vitamin K2, which is supposed to be good for preventing cvd and removing calcium from the blood and arteries. Cheese is also good for the gut.
      Major studies show that eating dairy significantly reduces all cause and cardiovascular mortality. Google the Golestan Dairy Intake Study. Reported in the Journal of Epidemiology in 2017. Funded by The National Cancer Institute, the NIH, several universities, including Harvard and an international cancer research org. Not funded by the dairy industry. It followed 42,000 people for 11 years, starting in 2004. Found significant reductions in all cause mortality and a 28% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease from eating dairy. Eating cheese and yogurt saw significant benefits in reduced all cause mortality. The highest 1/5 of dairy eaters saw the greatest benefits. There was no increase in cancer.
      The PURE Study was reported in the Lancet in Nov. 2018. This was a 5 continent, 21 country dairy study with 136,000 participants. Here is a quote from the study:
      “Dietary guidelines recommend minimising consumption of whole-fat dairy products, as they are a source of saturated fats and presumed to adversely affect blood lipids and increase cardiovascular disease and mortality. Evidence for this contention is sparse and few data for the effects of dairy consumption on health are available from low-income and middle-income countries. Therefore, we aimed to assess the associations between total dairy and specific types of dairy products with mortality and major cardiovascular disease.”
      And: “Dairy consumption was associated with lower risk of mortality and major cardiovascular disease events in a diverse multinational cohort.”

      Harvard, using data from the huge Physicians and Nurses Health Studies with more than 2000,000 participants also found lower all cause mortality from eating dairy.

      1. Alan

        Any particular reason why you are here so enthusiastically promoting dairy?

        The reason I ask is that the last two people doing so turned out to be

        1) an Australian farming consultant who was formerly head of the Victorian state dairy marketing board; and
        2) a New Zealand media marketing consultant working on behalf of a local dairy company

        1. Tom, Assuming you are referring to me. As usual, you left out a few important facts.

          I am an agricultural science graduate, ….the same as your guru, Dr Greger. I am not an Australian farming consultant, and never have been.
          Since graduation I have been a clothing wholesaler/retailer, a 2 year Army conscript, marketing manager of the Victorian Dairy Authority (1977-78), marketing consultant to Telstra, proprietor of a software-based telecommunications company (for 30 years – until I retired). Nothing to do with the dairy industry since 1978. Probably well before most of your ‘adherent’s were born. During my tenure at the Dairy Authority I introduced flavoured milk, and low-fat milk to Australia (Rev). Stupidly believing the nonsense propagated by Ancel Keys et al. in the 1960’s. Which only recently has been discredited (finally). I have spent the past 10-15 years telling anyone interested in listening that (so long as it is derived from grass-fed animals) saturated dairy fat is not the enemy. Moreover, consuming the low fat variety I so passionately introduced way back when was somewhat misguided. We were mislead, and for decades a whole bunch of nutritionists religiously propagated bunkum.
          What we get from this website is part useful fact, part-fiction, part ‘Barnum and Bailey’, and a big dose of faith. There are so many holes is otherwise well-reasoned arguments they are just not worth repeating. No matter how overwhelming the scientific case for dairy, or how shameless the selective bias by Dr Greger …Like the tree planted by the waters, you “shall not be moved”.

  5. Hi from New Zealand ,I am a tea drinker and cannot find a plant milk that tastes ok in tea. I’m well established on the WFPB food plan and loving it but I still drink tea with milk 2/3 times a day . I love almond milk with my coffee and cereal but am stuck with my tea . Anyone any suggestions . Joan

      1. Joan, maybe try some really good tasting tea and forget the milk entirely? Green jasmine tea, cinnamon spice, pouchong, darjeeling etc. There are good tasting herbal teas also. Find one or several you enjoy without the milk.

    1. Joan,

      I had the same problem with my coffee and oat milk turned out to be the one I genuinely don’t mind.

      I haven’t tried it with tea.

      I drink most of my teas without milk.

      There are videos on how to make your own.

        1. Milk does not diminish tea polyphenol levels. Could well be the same for soy. Any binding that occurs on contact is broken down in the gut.

          In 2007, Lorenz et al discovered that milk proteins bind to valuable polyphenols when added to tea. In response to criticism of their methodology, Lorenz et al conceded serious shortcomings in their their study:

          ‘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.

          That is, 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 of 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

          On the evidence, milk enhances the bioavailability of tea polyphenols.

  6. The stickler in me must point out the overuse of “until now”
    No one had ever looked for the virus in breast tissue from people with cancer…until now. The “[p]resence of BLV-DNA in breast tissues was strongly associated with diagnosed and histologically confirmed breast cancer…” As many as 37 percent of human breast cancer cases may be attributable to exposure to bovine leukemia virus.

    This piece of research was published in 2015. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4557937/
    My composition/English lit teacher from high school would throw a tantrum over this glaring error. 2015 is not now/2019. I know its kind of Dr. Gregers tag line, but it is inaccurate and sounds sloppy given the facts. Just some constructive criticism offered in good faith for the sticklers of the world (and students of Ms. Eileen Eagan, teacher of the highest caliber. She would likely roll over in her grave if she saw my grammar/typing. )

    1. Well, Mims, the original videos, which this blog is taken from were made in 2016.

      What I have seen is that, since that time, Dr. Greger has adapted some of his “until now” sayings to “until this study.”

      The blogs come from the transcripts of the videos and I think that details like that might get lost in how much work has to be done to keep this Nutritional Facts bus driving.

      1. But, as the videos are already published with a transcription, how hard is it to read/edit for clarity and precision if being up-cycled into a blog post 3 years later? I would rather see fewer videos done better, then daily videos that are sloppy as to the facts. As Ms. Egan would say, the small, easily caught, mistakes might convince your audience you could be wrong about the larger facts. Putting away my red pen, honestly just trying to be helpful. I appreciate this service.

        1. Mims, maybe you would prefer to “see fewer videos done better”, and maybe most of us are interested in the science instead, and appreciate the work involved to do them.

        2. Mims,

          I understand.

          Though the video was timely and accurate when it said, “Until now” perhaps it is the blog, which would benefit from another process.

      2. ‘What I have seen is that, since that time, Dr. Greger has adapted some of his “until now” sayings to “until this study.”

        Yes but that’s just ‘dumbing down’ his videos and posts. Personally, i didn’t mind videos and blogs that assumed viewers understood the meaning of such literary constructions..

    2. Mims

      I don’t think that you entirely appreciate the subleties of English.

      When we tell a story as Greger does in his videos, it is a common and accepted practice to use something called ‘the literary present’. That is what he is doing when he uses the term ‘now’ – it is not an error but a common literary or dramatic device..

  7. I wonder if we have bovine leukaemia in Australia. When I was vegetarian we used to buy unpasteurised milk from a neighbor. Can’t bear the thought of consuming dairy these days. I felt so much better when I stopped. The cruelty in the dairy industry should be enough of an incentive to stop anyone from consuming the stuff once one becomes aware of it .

    1. Apparently we do and it may even be a worse problem than in the US

      ‘Using similar techniques to study 96 Australian women, we report here detection of retrotranscribed BLV DNA in breast tissue of 40/50(80%) of women with breast cancer versus 19/46(41%) of women with no history of breast cancer, indicating an age-adjusted odds ratio and confidence interval of 4.72(1.71–13.05). These results corroborate the findings of the previous study of US women with an even higher odds ratio for the Australian population.’
      https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179367

  8. Breast Cancer
    ‘Thirteen meta-analyses explored associations between various dairy products and risk of breast cancer. Eight meta-analyses showed non-significant associations between ‘all-dairy products’, whole milk, milk, low-fat milk, cheese, dairy calcium or high-fat dairy consumption and the risk of breast cancer. Three meta-analyses showed decreased risk of breast cancer with higher consumption of ‘all-dairy products’, yogurt or low-fat dairy. Two meta-analyses showed increased risk of breast cancer with higher consumption of milk or cheese’.
    In summary, 11 meta-analyses demonstrated no association, or reduced association, and 2 meta-analysis demonstrated an increased risk. On the basis, I would not be losing any sleep over milk consumption. Those who are still concerned can solve the problem (if there is one) by consuming UHT milk.
    Cancer-specific mortality
    Three PMASRs reported non-significant association between milk consumption and cancer-specific mortality (online supplementary table 8). Two PMASRs64 65 reported non-significant association between yogurt, milk, cheese, all-dairy products or butter consumption and risk of cancer-specific mortality. One PMASR19 reported a significant decrease in risk of lung cancer-specific mortality with higher consumption of cheese and a non-significant association between milk consumption and lung cancer mortality.

    https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/1/e023625S

  9. WHO draft guidelines on dietary saturated and trans fatty acids: time for a new approach?

    The 2018 WHO draft guidelines on dietary saturated fatty acids and trans fatty acids recommend reducing total intake of saturated fat and replacing it with polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids
    The recommendations fail to take into account considerable evidence that the health effects of saturated fat varies depending on the specific fatty acid and on the specific food source
    Maintaining general advice to reduce total saturated fatty acids will work against the intentions of the guidelines and weaken their effect on chronic disease incidence and mortality
    A food based translation of the recommendations for saturated fat intake would avoid unnecessary reduction or exclusion of foods that are key sources of important nutrients

    https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l4137

    “I think what’s been said is that instead of looking individual little nutrients, look at the food — look at the whole food,” she told Kate and Quarters.
    “The food that a fat comes in is actually quite important.

    “For example, if you look at the fat in things like yoghurt and cheese, which are fermented foods, they have saturated fat in them, but in the context of the yoghurt and cheese in the fermentation process, that saturated fat is not going to be same as if you go out and eat a who stack of chips and chocolate and junk food.”

    Rosemary Stanton’s epiphany. She who was still quoting Ancel Keyes until a few years ago.

    https://www.3aw.com.au/just-in-saturated-fats-arent-that-bad-sometimes/

    PURE Study

    A study (PURE) published in The Lancet that shows dairy consumption is associated with a lower risk of mortality and major cardiovascular disease events in a multinational cohort.

    The researchers evaluated over 136,000 individuals (ages 35-70) across 21 countries.

    Comparing three or more dairy servings daily against no regular dairy intake, the researchers found the following outcomes:

    Total mortality: HR 0.83 (P=0.0052)
    Noncardiovascular mortality: HR 0.86 (P=0.046)
    Cardiovascular mortality: HR 0.77 (P=0.029)
    Major cardiovascular disease: HR 0.78 (P=0.0001)
    Stroke: HR 0.66 (P=0.003)
    There were no noteworthy connections between myocardial infarction and dairy intake (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.11; P=0.163).

    https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l4137/rapid-responses

  10. No it’s definitely not time to ignore the mountain of evidence that dietary saturated fat is a risk factor for various chronic diseases..

    The PURE study was designed and led by known saturated fat and sodium apologists from McGill University, itself long described as a ‘partner’ of the Canadian dairy industry. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that dairy foods are high in saturated fat and sodium.
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/diet-and-health-puzzling-past-paradox-to-pure-understanding_b_59a81d10e4b02498834a8f27

    And of course Stanton quoted Keys. She has done her research and knows that the lies told about Keys by saturated fat apologists are just that – lies. Why don’t you try fact-checking the claims about Keys that people like Taubes and Teicholz set out in their books and every saturated fat sceptic unthinkingly repeats?

      1. It fascinated me because I had gone off of sugar and refined carbs a full year before and that didn’t do much of anything, but going off the dairy got rid of things like my horizontal nail ridges and eye problems, etc.

        Everything improved.

    1. The concept that they went back to one-day diet intake report observational studies after interventional studies had already shown the opposite is a frustrating thing.

      A one-day food intake report doesn’t mean anything to me.

      1. Plus, when people already have the diseases, that is when they do an interventional trial and those are the ones which are more important to people who live in America nowadays.

        Reversing diseases trumps a theoretical process.

    2. WHO draft guidelines on dietary saturated and trans fatty acids: time for a new approach?

      – The 2018 WHO draft guidelines on dietary saturated fatty acids and trans fatty acids recommend reducing total intake of saturated fat and replacing it with polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids – The recommendations fail to take into account considerable evidence that the health effects of saturated fat varies depending on the specific fatty acid and on the specific food source – Maintaining general advice to reduce total saturated fatty acids will work against the intentions of the guidelines and weaken their effect on chronic disease incidence and mortality – A food based translation of the recommendations for saturated fat intake would avoid unnecessary reduction or exclusion of foods that are key sources of important nutrients

      https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l4137

    3. Vegetarianism increases the risk of stroke 20% (see below). Vegans may well consider following the example of the Mediterranean’s, who got the balance just right. Plant-based diet, plus dairy (42% lower risk of stroke). Moderate meat intake. Incorporate mono and polyunsaturated fats (salmon, herring, mackerel and trout, soybeans, tofu, walnuts, seeds, and olive/soybean/corn/sunflower oils).

      Re: ‘EPIC-Oxford study’- 2019

      Vegetarians = 13-22% lower ischaemic heart disease (narrowing of arteries) than meat eaters, but 20% higher rates of haemorrhagic and total stroke (bleeding in the brain). Possibly due to sub-optimal ‘circulating cholesterol subfractions, vitamin B12, amino acids, and fatty acids’.

      https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l4897

      The risk factors for stroke are high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, smoking, stress ….and (apparently) vegetarianism.

      ‘certain types of dairy fat may help guard against having a severe stroke, the researchers reported’ “Our findings not only support, but also significantly strengthen, the growing body of evidence which suggests that dairy fat, contrary to popular belief, does not increase risk of heart disease or overall mortality in older adults. In addition to not contributing to death, the results suggest that one fatty acid present in dairy may lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease, particularly from stroke,” said Marcia Otto, Ph.D., the study’s first and corresponding author and assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences at UTHealth School of Public Health.

      Dariush Mozaffarian, M.D., of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, was senior author of the study, funded by the National Institutes of Health.

      The study evaluated how multiple biomarkers of fatty acid present in dairy fat related to heart disease and all-cause mortality over a 22-year period.
      This measurement methodology, as opposed to the more commonly used self-reported consumption, gave greater and more objective insight into the impact of long-term exposure to these fatty acids, according to the report.

      Nearly 3,000 adults age 65 years and older were included in the study, which measured plasma levels of three different fatty acids found in dairy products at the beginning in 1992 and again at six and 13 years later.

      None of the fatty acid types were significantly associated with total mortality. In fact one type was linked to lower cardiovascular disease deaths. People with higher fatty acid levels, suggesting higher consumption of whole-fat dairy products, had a 42 percent lower risk of dying from stroke.

      http://www.newswise.com/articles/new-research-could-banish-guilty-feeling-for-consuming-whole-dairy-products

      Dairy fat also helps protect against diabetes

      https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.018410

  11. To Dr. Greger my husband and I have been following you and received your last video on BLV virus.
    I have just been diagnosed breast cancer that is in the bone. We have been on the vegan cruise this past March and had the opportunity to meet Dr T. Colin Campbell, Dr. Klaper, Dr. Esselstyn. We have also been following them and Dr. Neal Barnard. I am in desperate need of a recommendation from a conscience of all the experts as to where I can go for Holistic treatment.
    Thank You

  12. I am curious; what form of breast cancer has been associated with BLV?My sister and my sister in law and several friends have had breast cancer and only two have had the same sort of breast cancer.

    1. Yours is a good question, but it does not appear there is an answer yet. I reviewed all the studies Dr. Greger cited regarding breast cancer but non of them specified a specific kind of breast cancer. It seems this research if relatively recent and most sources identified BLV DNA changes, localized within mammary epithelium. However clarifying if these BLV-DNA occurred more in one type of breast cancer than another was not reviewed. Most studies simply indicated more research was needed, so it appears we’ll have to be patient for the answer to your question, if there is one type of cancer is more likely to result from the BLV connection. . As some studies indicated this connection could simply intensify the cancinogenic activity that is already going on in the breast, no matter what kind of cancer.

      1. In those countries (or herds) which have not eradicated BLV, consuming *raw milk* or undercooked meat may be a risk factor for breast cancer.
        http://theconversation.com/why-we-need-to-keep-an-eye-on-whether-a-blood-infection-in-cattle-is-linked-to-breast-cancer-in-humans-70318

        1. BLV can be readily eliminated with test, cull and surveillance programs.
        21 nations have eliminated the virus. To its discredit, this does not include the USA. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/vmi/2019/3202184/ 2. ‘pasteurization of milk completely inactivates BLV and BLV-infected cells’ Chung YS, Prior HC, Duffy PF, Rogers RJ, Mackenzie AR. The effect of pasteurisation onbovine leucosis virus-infected milk. Australian Veterinary Journal 1986;63:379–80.
        https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1751-0813.1986.tb02908.x 3. UHT milk is even safer than pasteurised milk.
        4. Raw milk is a risk factor unless there is complete certainty the herd is free of BLV.
        5. …those who consume heat-inactivated (pasteurised) dairy produce human antibodies to BLV. These are not infective ‘this may be a less accurate indication of BLV infection than the presence of BLV DNA in human cells’.
        https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-019-3891-9 That is, having BLV antibodies in the blood does not generally indicate one has BLV infection.
        6. BLV has become a higher risk with the industrialisation of dairying 7. Researchers are developing an attenuated provirus vaccine for bovines.

  13. “bovine leukemia virus”
    Its like prohibiting all products froms seeds and seed derived products because the existance of Aflatoxin.
    The difference is ,

    BLV in cattle is easy to eradicate by controling the ways it is spread amongst cattle-( Europe did it succesfully , if it still exist in Africa and USA , its only because weak government policy).
    Whereas AFLATOXIN in plants can be controled but wil always exist to some degree.)

  14. I had no idea! Truly frightening. I’m glad I’m intolerant to milk. I’m also going to need to rethink my occasional burger or steak.

Leave a Reply

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

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This