Does Paratuberculosis in Milk Trigger Type 1 Diabetes?

Does Paratuberculosis in Milk Trigger Type 1 Diabetes?
4.67 (93.33%) 9 votes

“Fear of consumer reaction” led the U.S. dairy industry to suppress the discovery in retail milk of live paraTB bacteria, a pathogen linked to type 1 diabetes.

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Type 1 diabetes “arises following the autoimmune destruction” of the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas. It’s “often diagnosed in children and adolescents,” who usually present with “a classic trio of symptoms”—excessive thirst, hunger, and urination—as their blood sugars spike. And, they need to go on insulin for the rest of their lives, since their own immune system attacked and destroyed their own ability to produce it. What would cause our body to do such a thing?

Whatever it is, it has been on the rise around the world, starting after World War II.  “Understanding why and how…the [current] pandemic of childhood diabetes” was produced “would be an important step toward reversing it.” A plausible guess involves so-called “molecular mimicry,” whereby a foreign antibody generator (like a bacterium or virus) “provokes an immune response, which cross-reacts with a similar”-looking protein on our own pancreas—such that when we attack the bug, our own organ gets caught in the cross-fire. 

Okay, so, what pancreatic proteins are type 1 diabetics self-attacking? In the 80s, a protein was identified, which, in the 90s, we realized looked an awful lot like a certain mycobacterial protein. Mycobacteria are a family of bacteria that cause diseases like tuberculosis and leprosy. And, all newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic children were found to have immune responses to this mycobacterial protein. But, that didn’t make any sense. I mean, type 1 diabetes is going up in the industrialized world, where TB and leprosy rates are going down. Well, there is one mycobacterial infection in livestock that’s shot up with the industrialization and globalization of animal agriculture—called paratuberculosis—which causes Johne’s disease in animals, now recognized as a global problem for the livestock industry.

Huh, weren’t there like a dozen studies suggesting that exposure to cow’s milk may be “an important determinant of subsequent type 1 diabetes” in childhood? Putting two and two together, an idea was put forward in 2006. Could mycobacterium paratuberculosis be a “trigger” for type 1 diabetes? It was a compelling enough idea that researchers decided to put it to the test.

They attempted to test the association of MAP, the full name for the bug—mycobacterium avium paratuberculosis—with type 1 diabetes, by testing diabetics for the presence of the bacteria in their blood. And, lo and behold, most of the diabetic patients were found positive for the bug, compared to only a minority of the healthy control subjects. This evidence of MAP bacteria in the blood of patients with type 1 diabetes “might provide an important foundation in establishing an infectious” cause for type 1 diabetes. “These results…might have…implications for countries that have the greatest livestock populations and [a] high incidence” of both MAP and diabetes, like the United States. Johne’s disease is what you call the disease when livestock get infected by the bug. The reason the researchers chose Sardinia, an island off the coast of Italy, is because “[p]aratuberculosis is present in more than 50% of Sardinian herds.”

If they think that’s bad, the last national survey of dairy herds in the U.S. shows 68% are infected with MAP, especially those big industrial dairies. 95% percent of operations with more than 500 cows came up positive. It’s estimated the disease costs the U.S. industry more than a billion dollars a year.

How do people become exposed? “The most important routes of access of MAP [in]to the [human] food chain appear to be contaminated milk, milk products, and meat from infected [cattle, sheep, and goats]. …MAP or MAP DNA [has been] detected in raw milk,…pasteurized milk,…infant…formula,…cheese, ice cream,…muscle and organ tissues…and retail meat.”

How do we know paraTB bacteria survive pasteurization? Because Wisconsin researchers bought hundreds of pints of retail milk off store shelves from three of our top milk-producing states, and tested for the presence of viable (meaning living) MAP bacteria in retail milk. And, 2.8% came back positive for live paraTB bacteria, with most brands yielding at least one positive sample. So, it can survive pasteurization.

If paraTB does end up being a diabetes trigger, then “these findings indicate that retail milk [in the United States] would need to be considered as a transmission vector.” Why hasn’t the public heard about this research?  Perhaps because the industry isn’t too keen on sharing. This is from the Journal of Dairy Science: “Fear of consumer reaction can impede rational, open discussion of scientific studies.”

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: ponce_photography via pixabay. Image has been modified.

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Type 1 diabetes “arises following the autoimmune destruction” of the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas. It’s “often diagnosed in children and adolescents,” who usually present with “a classic trio of symptoms”—excessive thirst, hunger, and urination—as their blood sugars spike. And, they need to go on insulin for the rest of their lives, since their own immune system attacked and destroyed their own ability to produce it. What would cause our body to do such a thing?

Whatever it is, it has been on the rise around the world, starting after World War II.  “Understanding why and how…the [current] pandemic of childhood diabetes” was produced “would be an important step toward reversing it.” A plausible guess involves so-called “molecular mimicry,” whereby a foreign antibody generator (like a bacterium or virus) “provokes an immune response, which cross-reacts with a similar”-looking protein on our own pancreas—such that when we attack the bug, our own organ gets caught in the cross-fire. 

Okay, so, what pancreatic proteins are type 1 diabetics self-attacking? In the 80s, a protein was identified, which, in the 90s, we realized looked an awful lot like a certain mycobacterial protein. Mycobacteria are a family of bacteria that cause diseases like tuberculosis and leprosy. And, all newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic children were found to have immune responses to this mycobacterial protein. But, that didn’t make any sense. I mean, type 1 diabetes is going up in the industrialized world, where TB and leprosy rates are going down. Well, there is one mycobacterial infection in livestock that’s shot up with the industrialization and globalization of animal agriculture—called paratuberculosis—which causes Johne’s disease in animals, now recognized as a global problem for the livestock industry.

Huh, weren’t there like a dozen studies suggesting that exposure to cow’s milk may be “an important determinant of subsequent type 1 diabetes” in childhood? Putting two and two together, an idea was put forward in 2006. Could mycobacterium paratuberculosis be a “trigger” for type 1 diabetes? It was a compelling enough idea that researchers decided to put it to the test.

They attempted to test the association of MAP, the full name for the bug—mycobacterium avium paratuberculosis—with type 1 diabetes, by testing diabetics for the presence of the bacteria in their blood. And, lo and behold, most of the diabetic patients were found positive for the bug, compared to only a minority of the healthy control subjects. This evidence of MAP bacteria in the blood of patients with type 1 diabetes “might provide an important foundation in establishing an infectious” cause for type 1 diabetes. “These results…might have…implications for countries that have the greatest livestock populations and [a] high incidence” of both MAP and diabetes, like the United States. Johne’s disease is what you call the disease when livestock get infected by the bug. The reason the researchers chose Sardinia, an island off the coast of Italy, is because “[p]aratuberculosis is present in more than 50% of Sardinian herds.”

If they think that’s bad, the last national survey of dairy herds in the U.S. shows 68% are infected with MAP, especially those big industrial dairies. 95% percent of operations with more than 500 cows came up positive. It’s estimated the disease costs the U.S. industry more than a billion dollars a year.

How do people become exposed? “The most important routes of access of MAP [in]to the [human] food chain appear to be contaminated milk, milk products, and meat from infected [cattle, sheep, and goats]. …MAP or MAP DNA [has been] detected in raw milk,…pasteurized milk,…infant…formula,…cheese, ice cream,…muscle and organ tissues…and retail meat.”

How do we know paraTB bacteria survive pasteurization? Because Wisconsin researchers bought hundreds of pints of retail milk off store shelves from three of our top milk-producing states, and tested for the presence of viable (meaning living) MAP bacteria in retail milk. And, 2.8% came back positive for live paraTB bacteria, with most brands yielding at least one positive sample. So, it can survive pasteurization.

If paraTB does end up being a diabetes trigger, then “these findings indicate that retail milk [in the United States] would need to be considered as a transmission vector.” Why hasn’t the public heard about this research?  Perhaps because the industry isn’t too keen on sharing. This is from the Journal of Dairy Science: “Fear of consumer reaction can impede rational, open discussion of scientific studies.”

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: ponce_photography via pixabay. Image has been modified.

Doctor's Note

For a deeper discussion of other possibilities as to why cow’s milk consumption is linked to this autoimmune destruction of insulin production, see Does Casein in Milk Trigger Type 1 Diabetes? and Does Bovine Insulin in Milk Trigger Type 1 Diabetes?.

If it’s in the milk, what about the meat? That’s the subject of my next two videos in this three-part series: Meat Consumption and the Development of Type 1 Diabetes and Does Paratuberculosis in Meat Trigger Type 1 Diabetes?.

If we don’t drink milk, though, what about our bone health? See my videos Long-Term Vegan Bone Health and Is Milk Good for Our Bones?.

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

50 responses to “Does Paratuberculosis in Milk Trigger Type 1 Diabetes?

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. And is it possible to eradicate this ‘MAP’ infection? Does it pass out of the gut, human body, eventually, or does it
    stick around for life, like some latent virus types are known to do?

    1. One nasty bug. Responsible -arguably- for Crohn’s Disease and other GI disorders. Hard to culture, hard to find in the body once it has made itself at home deep in tissue (probably why such low detection of sufferers in blood samples), and damn hard to kill.
      Crohn’s is sooo common now that my daughter’s congenital bowel obstruction was misdiagnosed as Crohn’s -leading me to learn about MAP. Worth a look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CELZLY2X9c

  2. I remember meeting a girl who had T1DM in the late 70’s, and I was asking her about it. She told me that she had to inject herself with insulin every day, and when I questioned her about how she got her disease, she told me that they were not sure, but that it was though that some children developed the disease from drinking milk as children which I thought was just crazy and it caused me a bout of cognitive dissonance because at the time I believed that all children required milk to grow up healthy and that milk was the “perfect food.”
    When I think back on my childhood, I now feel as if I have dodged a bullet because we grew up near a small dairy operation with less than 100 cows, and we would buy raw milk from them. We would bring glass gallon cider bottles that we’d clean out, and would go fill them up at the dairy. It was the best tasting milk I’d ever had because it was about fresh as you could get it unless you nursed from the cow directly. The difference in taste between raw milk and the stuff we purchased from the supermarket is analogous to that of fresh squeezed orange juice as compared to orange juice made from concentrate. It is significant. Anyway, the state health department found out that this dairy was selling milk to the public, and put an end to the practice which is probably a good thing, but I remember being very disappointed at the time.
    I suppose that the point of the story, if there is one, is that dairy has been suspected of being a cause of childhood onset diabetes for some time now.

    1. That’s interesting. My dad was T1, but adult onset in the 1970’s too, around age 40. He was no stranger to dairy either.

      For some reason my friend’s mother fed him raw milk. He continually had the runs from the stuff. Relativity rules. I bet you couldn’t hold down that “best tasting” stuff now. Twice in the last decade or so I’ve mistakenly trusted food to be vegan when it wasn’t. Each time somebody slipped in some dairy. Came right out. Nasty stuff.

      1. Apologies, I erroneously hit the report instead of the respond button. For the record, I didn’t find anything that you wrote objectionable, and probably wouldn’t report it even if I did.

        You are correct of course. I cannot imagine drinking raw or pasteurized milk, but I did love the stuff as a child. There are several fad raw milk diets being peddled, but it is hard to imagine drinking such dangerous stuff, and from a pathogen perspective, it the pasteurized stuff isn’t that safe either. I stopped drinking milk in my 20’s when I realized that we were the only animals who consumed milk out of infancy. I just didn’t seem natural. Later on, I gave up on cheese because it is loaded with saturated fat. I loved ice-cream, but gave that one up when I went vegan around seven years ago.

        It’s easy to give up on dairy on once one realizes what it is, nasty stuff…

    2. Interesting.
      The video cites a report that 63% of Type1 diabetes patients tested positive for the microbe, while 16% of healthy controls were positive. However, I assume that only a small % of the population has type 1 diabetes, so actually only a small % of people infected with the mycobacterium then develop diabetes. It’s possible that you did drink contaminated milk, but your immune system may not be prone to developing the disorder. Your t cell receptor repertoire may not include the one that binds the mycobacterium, and also cross reacts to your own cells’ antigens, so you do not produce autoimmune t cells. Or your immune system may be regulated so as to otherwise suppress the autoimmune reaction.

      My son went to a summer camp that the state of Vermont forbade from drinking their own cow’s milk without official processing equipment (I believe). It seemed like needless government interference at the time, but perhaps it was wise (for reasons other than the microbe discussed here).

  3. My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes 2 years ago. After communications with Dr. Greger a/ nutrition facts my daughter stopped the milk products entirely. Our whole family reacts pretty strongly to dairy products. My daughter has since joined me in been eating plant based, and has a much better blood glucose control. And added bonus is no more stuffy nose and secretions, or GI disturbances.
    I saw in Dr Greger’s book the relation with dairy and type 1.

    1. Sorry to hear that your daughter has been burdened with Type I, but good on you and the family for going dairy-free. One auto-immune disorder increases the odds of another so you took an important step to avoiding asthma lupus Crohn’s etc.

      1. The article is also published, with another generic American sounding name as the author, at the web site of the ‘Houston Leader’ as well as the ‘Health&Wellness’ site. It’s kind of offensive that this editor at Houston’s real Leader News considers a vegan diet to be such an outlandish concept.

        “My problem isn’t with fake news sites like the Houston Leader. My problem is that real news – the real local, trusted news we once relied upon to make decisions – has followed the way of the vegan diets and their mental illnesses. Nothing, not even integrity, is beyond grasping for a few extra website views. So in case there’s any confusion, we are not the Houston Leader, and we will never publish stories that don’t matter to the Heights, Oak Forest, Garden Oaks and the neighborhoods of North Houston. “

      2. That is astonishing. So brazen! I have just sent off a very polite email to the article’s author to ask for contacts for the study’s lead researcher. Let’s see what she comes up with. I guess I will not get a reply, but it may be that the website was fed the article by someone else and that they were duped too. Bad journalism in any case, but if they are party to spreading dangerous misinformation they should be sued. There must be ways for hungry lawyers to mount class actions against these fraudsters and their paymasters.

        Edit: We have our answer. It is also a fake email address!

        1. It’s unfortunate that so much is published in mainstream papers and magazines without those publishing looking at the veracity of the “research” they are quoting or relying on. It all seems to be done to keep the public confused so people will continue doing as they do now. As they teach in sales classes, “The confused mind always says no.”

    1. this morning like every morning I watch fox news out of Detroit . They had this doctor on who was a heart specialist . They had him on almost all morning , he explained how the heart works and what is a heart attack etc. What got me when they got to talking about food was , he said to avoid any and all bread products , they were the cause of obesity , and obesity was the cause of heart disease . So they asked him what should we be eating? His answer was well one thing would be eggs and lots of them as they had no bearing on heart disease and it has now been proven eating products with cholesterol in them have no bearing on heart disease. Hey if your from Detroit area and you take this guy’s advice , I just wanted you know , it’s been nice knowing ya all.

      1. I recently watched a doc about the “Widow Maker”, from supposedly silent heart disease that goes undetected except with a calcium scan, which it promoted, while essentially ridiculing other typical medical approaches, yet not one mention of diet, lifestyle or prevention.
        On a similar note, I encourage everyone to read this, http://nutritionstudies.org/british-broadcasting-corporation-bbc-your-credibility-is-tarnished/ and send a message to BBC! Infuriating!

        1. VegeTater, This was a definite hatchet job, and you are correct. It is not pleasant.

          Dr. Yeo, the interviewer in this thinly veiled bit of tabloid trash, cherry picks points from his interview with Dr. Campbell’s and intercuts attacks on those position with some symbolic logic slight of hand without really linking the relevance of his critiques to that sliver of Campbell’s observations. Yeo even has the temerity to accuse Campbell of conformational bias while he can hardly utter a word that isn’t slathered in it.

          If that wasn’t bad enough, Yeo seem rather patronizing and disrespectful. Whatever else one cares to say about Dr. Campbell, one cannot deny that he was a dedicated and conscientious scientist of the finest caliber, and as such deserves the courtesy of being confronted directly with any criticisms especially if you are making the effort to interview the guy. It doesn’t seem that Dr. Yeo has a lot of respect for either the scientific method or Dr. Campbell.

          This video is pretty hard to watch. I don’t know if I’d recommend it, unless, of course, you are actually looking to be annoyed, but in that case, you needn’t take the trouble of watching this video. You can simply turn on the evening news.

      2. Much thanks to the few doctors who educate themselves on their own time, but MDs become MDs without any meaningful nutrition training. I’d love for this Detroit doc to tell us his qualifications.

        1. He’s obviously pocketing egg-board money or completely ignorant. Possibly both.

          A revolting development because folks love to hear good things about their bad decisions, and will “latch onto” whatever study/theory/bullshit fits their lifestyle.

      3. This is another shining example of why I quit watching any sort of “news” years ago.

        Turns out that the more you know about an issue (really know from studies and experience, not from watching TV), the easier it is to poke holes in nearly EVERY thing “reported” on the “news”. It’s utter garbage for information, completely jerking the populace around by their emotions and logic conflicts in order to serve the great Master of the ruthless Incs., which is $.

        Maybe you’ll also now notice other “untruths”, “half-truths”, and “bald-faced lies” coming from such sources. It shouldn’t be difficult. They don’t care about truth, they want unrest and discord. It feeds their views/sales, no matter which “side” they pretend to be on.

    2. “The American Medical Association (AMA), the largest organization of physicians in the United States, this month formally recognizes the highly controversial “Trump Depression Disorder” (TDD), as a disease. “The purpose of the policy is to advance treatment and prevention,” wrote AMA President, Nathan Lee Anderson. “It issues a call for a shift in the way the medical community tackles this complicated issue.”

      If that’s not a giveaway as to how fake this site is, I don’t know what is.

      BTW, I HATE this format! Bring back Disqus!

      1. Yes, this bit of replying/commenting is now as clunky as starting your car with a hand crank and a manual choke. Feels quite primitive.

        I too greatly anticipate next forward move in commenting software packages. It doesn’t have to be DQ, but this is like scrawling on bark with charcoal.

        Somebuddy call me. wp

  4. When enabling a healthier populace means putting 1,000s of people out of work, the government will always side with jobs. Our micro-managing bureaucrats & politicians claim they’re protecting us from becoming a “buyer beware” marketplace, but in fact they’ve created exactly that.

    1. What about the 10’s of 1,000’s OUT of work for illness and treatments and disability brought on by unsound dietary practices and unsafe food products?

      It’s not about the people, so long as the people have a way to pay the bloated bills of “modern” medicine as it is currently practiced.

  5. This is really interesting, so living in Australia, I looked up the number of herds with Johne’s disease (MAP carriers) here. I wanted to see if it is widespread here as in the US. In July 2016 in Australia there were 1150 herds with MAP, and Australia has been divided up into MAP-free zones (most of the north) and control zones (southern Australia including some areas of New South Wales). It is a real concern to the government.
    They also have a system to control its spread – which includes a 3 step calving plan – whereby calves are removed far from their mothers within 12 hrs of birth, and not placed in any paddock that has had adult cows for 12 months. Because MAP resides in faeces and thus, the soil.
    So Australian milk drinkers are also at risk; and it is also in a small number of beef herds here, and in some other livestock animals including alpacas and goats. Also – it is not discovered by widespread testing here – rather by farmers reporting cows that are suffering from it. So who knows how much more widespread it actually is?

  6. Interesting report on an interesting subject. However, it is unrealistic to believe we can live in a world completely free of mycobacteria. One estimate is that mycobacteria could be present in drinking water in “massive numbers,” on the amount of up to 700,000 or 7 × 105 organisms per liter of water
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16219512

    As Dr Greger correctly point out, in one US study (JAY L et al) 2.8% of pasteurised milk samples contained MAP. However, it appears one also needs a genetic predisposition to contract auto-immune disease. (Researchers have found polymorphisms of the SLC11a1 gene and MAP in T1DM patients). Given the widespread consumption of milk throughout the planet, including raw milk, and the comparatively low incidence of juvenile, type 1 diabetes, the risk of contracting this disease from cows milk is not impossible – but appears low. Likewise, MAP can be contracted from virtually any livestock, in which case there would be a very high incidence in farmers. Which does not appear to be the case. There appears to be a greater risk in intensive farms – which is not surprising.
    Generally, pasteurisation will destroy MAP (in calf-rearing, farmers pasteurise raw milk for calves – 145°F (63°C) for 30 minutes for batch pasteurization, or 162°F (72°C) for 15 seconds for flash pasteurization. ‘Pasteurization kills virtually all MAP that may contaminate raw milk as well as other viral and bacterial agents that could affect the health of dairy heifer replacements’
    http://www.johnes.org/dairy/control.html
    However, there remains legitimate uncertainty. To reduce the risk, those who are sufficiently concerned can purchase milk from small, less-intensive dairies, perhaps swap to UHT milk (130°C for 1 or more seconds) or re-pasteurise their pasteurised milk at home (as above). Those who have family members with Chrone’s or Type I diabetes should apply even more caution.

    1. Re: “unrealistic to believe we can live in a world completely free of mycobacteria”
      I did not hear or read that Michael Greger, MD or anyone else made any claims about having a diet or lifestyle “completely free of mycobacteria.”
      It appears that you have created this fallacious Straw Man argument and proceded to provided claims to support this Straw Man argument in an attempt to condone the unnecessary consumption teat secretion from non-human animals.

      1. JD. I am afraid this is another example of Dr G’s highly selective criticism of dairy.
        Milk is the ultimate food source on this planet. Nothing else comes close. This is why 10,000 years ago European (and some African) tribes developed a genetic mutation allowing adult humans to digest milk – thereby largely displacing the hunter gatherers of the time. In effect, giving them a genetic advantage over their contemporaries. So, it is quite incorrect to suggest humans are historically divorced from the teat of another animal. Rather, the human genome is (amongst many other things) the adapted product of cows milk. This does not make milk consumption essential in contemporary times. It just means it provides a range of essential nutrients far more efficiently than any other food source. The ethical aspects of consuming milk are a quite separate issue, and a matter for each individual to consider. However, your solution (to cease cows milk production entirely) would result in the demise of the dairy cow as a species. It is far from certain in my mind cows would prefer your solution (extinction) to mine (the mutually beneficial and humane exploitation of cows) if given that choice.
        In regards to mycobacteria the risks of pasteurised cows milk to humans is so low as to be negligible. Far lower than bacterial contamination of fruit and vegetables: For example, listeria, cyclosporiasis, pseudomonas, e-coli, salmonella.
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-09/frozen-vegetable-listeria-recall-from-woolworths-iga-aldi-stores/9959692.
        https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/us/del-monte-vegetable-trays-parasite-nyt.html
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1682368

        ‘In a study of more than 100,000 illnesses linked to food between 1990 and 2006, fruit and vegetables caused more problems than poultry and beef combined. Buying organic produce will reduce your exposure to pesticides but not necessarily to bacterial contaminants’.
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/consumer-reports-fruits-and-vegetables-are-common-causes-of-food-borne-illness

        ‘As Americans increase their consumption of fresh vegetables and fruit, the level of produce-related foodborne illness is climbing, according to Robert V. Tauxe, M.D., deputy director of CDC’s Division of Foodborne, Waterborne and Environmental Diseases’
        http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/list-vegetables-high-risk-bacteria-1915.html

        1. Q: Is it possible in your responses that you debate without using fallacies and also provide empirical evidence for your claims?

          1) “Dr G’s highly selective criticism of dairy.”
          A fallacious (Poisoning the Well) preframe claim that you provide zero evidence for.

          2) Your responses and fallacious arguments/claims clearly expose your pro-milk bias. Has the leanings of a Dairy Industry Shill or just easily fooled by their plethora of propaganda and you help them for free!

          3) “Milk is the ultimate food source on this planet. Nothing else comes close.”
          A) Zero empirical evidence provided. A ‘cuz I said so’ (Ipse dixet) is not a sound argument.
          B) Your so called “ultimate food source” is missing 3 essential nutrients and extremely low in 8 nutrients (evidence proided in #6)

          4) “This is why 10,000 years ago European (and some African) tribes developed a genetic mutation allowing adult humans to digest milk – thereby largely displacing the hunter gatherers of the time. In effect, giving them a genetic advantage over their contemporaries.”
          Use of the Hasty generalization #fallacy – A genetic mutation for a few (~25% world population) does not auto-magically make it an overall advantage for them and a disadvantage for others. – According to W.H.O. ~75% of the world human population is NOT lactase persistent – meaning they do not persist in producing lactose – only created to break down lactose in milk.

          5) “So, it is quite incorrect to suggest humans are historically divorced from the teat of another animal.”
          A) 25% is NOT a majority, meaning 75% “divorced” from lactase persistence and apparently you maintain a delusion that 25% is somehow a majority ‘marriage’.
          B) Most Africans, Asians, indigenous Australians and S. Americans are in fact “divorced” from consuming the secretions from “teat of another animal” since they do not consume milk or if they do it is extremely minor and only a recent ‘modern food’ addition. All those populations have thrived very well without hundreds of thousands of years without incorporating milk. Current Worldwide Total Milk Consumption per capita http://chartsbin.com/view/1491 (source: FAO Statistics Division)

          6) “a range of essential nutrients far more efficiently than any other food source”
          A) milk provides a narrow “range” – According to the USDA sourced nutrient database milk only score a 45 (100 is max.) on the Completeness Score. Milk and extremely very low or 0% of minerals: iron, copper, manganese and Vitamins: C, E, K, Niacin, B6, Folate and zero fiber http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/69/2
          B) Zero evidence provided for efficiency compared to other food sources. Try your ‘cuz I said so’ (Ipse dixet) for the biased fools who fall for that.

          7) “The ethical aspects of consuming milk are a quite separate issue”
          A) Nice try but attempts to disconnect immoral frameworks and consequences is fallacious and UNethical.
          B) Again, save you ‘cuz I said so’ (Ipse dixet) for the biased fools who fall for that.

          8) “your solution (to cease cows milk production entirely) would result in the demise of the dairy cow as a species”
          A) Dairy cows are a Man Made species!
          B) Creating a fallacious Straw Man argument by putting words in my mouth is also UNethical in communications & debate!
          C) The only “demise” is that the cows will no longer be forced to: be imprisoned, artificially inseminated, life-shortening reproducing cycles, have their children kidnapped…

          9) “cows would prefer your solution”
          A) Your imaginary crystal ball of sympathy or empathy towards the thoughts and lives of unborn dairy cows is HILLARIOUS at best!
          B) Too bad your empathy is narrow-minded towards only to imaginary future cows and apparently non-existent towards currently living cows!

          10) As far as “fruit and vegetables caused more problems than poultry and beef combined.”
          You seem to be either ignorant as to the #1 primary (not secondary) source of bacteria contamination of fruits & vegetables and/or wish to frame dairy and meat industry as clean, pure and innocent!

          1. JD. Non-compelling it may be, but nonetheless I welcome your critique. You have at least read and considered my comments, which is more than most. It also allows the OBJECTIVE reader (those that sit between the dairy fanatics like me, and the vegan fanatics like you) asses where the truth lies between our opposing nutritional positions. I am a dairy fanatic based on the scientific evidence, that’s all. Of which there is a great abundance.
            Mostly, it is unrelated to ‘Big Dairy’ and ‘Dairy Shill’, those infantile terms so beloved by fanatic vegans. Just sort through the mass of scientific evidence, as I did commencing over 10 years ago. One becomes accustomed to their consistency in demonstrating the great benefit of milk consumption. Here is the latest, demonstrating a possible 42% reduction in risk of stroke in dairy consumers, in a study unrelated to the dairy industry (*supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (grant R01HL085710 and R01HL085710-07S1).*

            *‘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.’*

            *“Consumers have been exposed to so much different and conflicting information about diet, particularly in relation to fats,” she said. “It’s therefore important to have robust studies, so people can make more balanced and informed choices based on scientific fact rather than hearsay,*

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

            JD, you certainly will not get this sort of information from ‘NutritionFacts’. It will be shoved in the proverbial pigeon hole. If this were a website dedicated to animal welfare or industrialized agriculture you might well find us more in agreement than disagreement. But it is not.
            It is a website that claims to objectively represent nutritional facts.
            When it comes to dairy, this does not occur. It is treated selectively, and not in a positive way. If one wishes to bypass the consumption of dairy based on environmental or animal welfare issues, then this should be a scientifically informed choice. An informed choice cannot occur if one is misled into believing milk is harmful, or nutritionally, non-beneficial.
            This is not supported by the vast majority of scientific evidence. When it comes to these matters I suggest there is no place for blind faith. Leave that to the religions and cults.
            There are many parts of the world where milk is not affordable or freely available, including those without the genetic mutation enabling them to digest lactose. However, this is a situation they are addressing. “I have a dream, a dream to provide every Chinese person, especially our children, ‘1 jin’ (500 grams) of nourishing milk a day.”
            Premier Wen Jiabao – http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-04/26/content_577182.htm. The Chinese are not frivolous people. You can be certain their ‘dream’ has an underlying purpose. To improve the health and wellbeing of their people.
            Finally, there are 260 million dairy cows in the world. You tell me how many would survive if overnight the world ceased consuming milk? The answer of course, just a handful of curios located in zoos. 260 million cows that would never experience existence at all. So, the equation is as follows.
            Weighing the value of existence of all these animals against the degree of suffering some of them may occasionally experience. We don’t euthanise all horses because some of them suffer. Instead, we enact laws to protect against this suffering. This is the rational thing to do. It will not eliminate all suffering, just as we cannot eliminate all human suffering.
            But it will attempt to minimise it, whilst giving these animals an existence they otherwise they would not enjoy. I commend your sensitivity to the cause.And I am the first to concede I am simplifying the argument.
            But, these issues are not as simple as ceasing milk consumption. It is a good deal more complex than that.

            1. You VERY quickly responded to my question:
              “Q: Is it possible in your responses that you debate without using fallacies and also provide empirical evidence for your claims?”
              by spewing out a plethora of fallacious arguments, starting with a personal attack Ad Hominem!

              1) “vegan fanatic”
              Since your facts are few and since I exposed your chronic use of fallacies you went with your next best thing – Ad Hominem personal attacking

              2) “‘Big Dairy’ and ‘Dairy Shill’, those infantile terms”
              A) I NEVER said “Big Dairy”
              B) I stated “Has the leanings of a Dairy Industry Shill” which is neither fallacious or infantile

              3) Moving the Goal Post – The study you referenced (Serial measures of circulating biomarkers of dairy fat and total and cause-specific mortality in older adults: the Cardiovascular Health Study) does not specifically support any of your prior claims.

              4) You have again failed to address the empirical medical science fact that about 75% of the world human population is not lactase persistent (lactose intolerant)

              5) “animal welfare”
              I have little interest in discussing, placating, playing mental pattycake and coddling the fears of an animal enslaving industry and those who support them since they are either mentally incapable of and/or not interested in
              A) fully addressing facts without resorting to fallacies (cherry picking, ad hominem, slippery slope, red herring, fallacy of tradition, appeal to fear, appeal to nature… too many to list) and
              B) avoiding addressing their logically and morally inconsistent perspectives and behavior towards human and non-human animals.

              6) Too many more fallacious arguments for me to have an interest in addressing…

              If you are able to avoid using fallacious arguments in a response then I might respond again.

              1. 1) “You seem very troubled – and angry. ”
                Please refrain from the ad hominem personal attack – It makes your argument look foolish. But maybe you imagining pandering to a poorly educated and easily duped audience who fall for those debate tricks.

                2) “No answer I give you is going to satisfy you or change your mind.”
                WOW two fallacies in one – false dilemma and poisoning the well.
                It is very simple to change my mind – STEP 1 make a well-formed sound (non-fallacious) claim STEP 2 provide sufficient empirical evidence to back up the clam. So far you have failed to do either!

                3) “try something other than sophist debating techniques:”
                You have zero evidence that I have made any “false arguments” This is clearly just more of your combative Gasslighting since you fail to be able to stay on topic and defend your claims.
                You chronic ad hominem attacks and plethora of other fallacies have shown plenty of evidence that you prefer combative/eristic debating techniques

                1. JD. You are condemned by your own words, its just that you have not figured that out…yet. You ask for evidence. But will you actually read the evidence if the truth in it does not coincide with your perhaps well-meaning ‘beliefs’ ? Will you maintain an open mind ? On all the evidence, that answer is an emphatic no ! But I will ignore that if you give an undertaking to try and have an open mind, and at least consider that thing called the ‘balance of probabilities’. You give that undertaking and I will post the results of hundreds of research studies which support milk consumption of milk. As for the ethical aspects you might be on firmer ground, but that rightfully belongs in a forum completely unrelated to ‘nutritionfacts’

  7. The other thing is that the body may not need viable MAP bacteria to develop type 1 diabetes.
    Just the presence of the protein might be enough.

    I’d guess that because it seems to be some sort of ‘allergic response’ that is why not all those exposed to the protein develop type 1 diabetes, it really depends on the immune response.
    Also living bacteria are more likely to excite the immune system so I assume that forms a greater risk.

    It would be interesting to see if newborn babies blood could be tested for a reaction to the protein to see if it’s a predictor of type 1 diabetes risk.
    In those cases where there is a reaction, the parents could be told to strictly avoid all dairy for the child.

    1. The immune system of newborns are not developed yet, and rely on their mother’s immune function that was passed to them in the womb and via breastmilk. Testing a newborn would just be like testing the mother.

  8. This is off-topic but I think it is important enough to raise here.

    I have always been favourably impressed by the quality of information on the Medscape site. However, Medscape has just posted a review article on low carb high fat diets, by the notorious Tim Noakes, which advises physicians to consider recommending such diets to “patients with atherogenic dyslipidaemia, insulin resistance, and the frequently associated NAFLD.” Lord knows how many people would be harmed if physicians followed Noakes’ advice
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/874707

    I am not a physician and therefore unable to contact Medscape about this but I wonder if any of the physicians in the WFPB community would be willing to do so?

    1. TG: Your comment got caught in the ‘pending’ section for some reason. That may explain why you did not see it at first. I rescued it.

      Great comment. I hope our participating physicians will take you up on your call to action.

  9. This review article in the Lancet disagrees that the scientific evidnce links milk to Tyoe 1 diabetes. Lancet is quite a presitgeous journal. Rewers, Marian, and Johnny Ludvigsson. “Environmental risk factors for type 1 diabetes.” The Lancet 387.10035 (2016): 2340-2348. It states:

    Most prospective birth cohort studies have not shown any link between early exposure to cows’ milk and
    either islet autoimmunity or type 1 diabetes…..

  10. Hello,

    Isn’t MAP (or MAC) found in water and soil? Is it possible that the meat and milk have this in them because of that, and that even water has MAP in it? I really don’t know the difference, if there is any, between MAP & MAC. Is MAP found in plan products?

    Thank you in advance for your answer!

    Leslie

  11. any new information on type 1 diabetes? my nephew is 14 and has been diagnosed. all I know that the pancreatic cells are still growing in his age so is there something we can do? how to stop autoimmune system from killing the cells?

  12. Hey everyone, if anyone knows any information or doctors that can help with reversing type 1 diabetes please let me know. I am trying to help someone who eats animal products but is willing to turn vegan if that helps cure type 1 diabetes. Please, I do need help
    Any help is much appreciated thank you.

  13. I’d suggest you visit plantbaseddoctors.org and search for an internal medicine doctor or endocrinologist. Type 1 diabetes is unfortunately not generally curable (the pancreatic damage occurs early and is not generally reversible) BUT control and secondary disease prevention in type 1 diabetes is far easier on a whole food, plant based diet than on a Western Diet.

    Best luck! Dr Anderson, Health Support Volunteer

  14. This recent study demonstrates a far more likely contributing factor to childhood Type I diabetes and cancers (possibly also autism). The apparent solution? Greater infant exposure to infections, dogs, cats and livestock:

    ‘Professor Greaves theory found support in a study published in April of 2018 in Cancer Medicine.9 In fact, the researchers even cited Greaves in their study summary, stating, “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 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’.

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

    Just another example of the important synergy between humans and animals.

Leave a Reply

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

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This