Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To Dairy, or not to Dairy, that is the question.. :)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Paleo Man View Post
    Checking on my recollection on the high incidence of bovine leukemia virus in US dairy cattle.

    Here is a USDA Info Sheet from the National Animal Health Monitoring System . . .

    http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/dairy/da...y07_is_BLV.pdf

    In 2007 they tested milk from the bulk milk tanks of 534 dairy operations.

    Milk tested positive for bovine leukemia virus in 82.1% of the medium sized dairies, 83.2% of the small dairies, and 100% of the large dairies.

    Bovine leukemia virus is considered a bit of a nuisance in dairies because it causes malignant lymphoma and lymposarcoma in 1 to 5% of infected cows, per the fact sheet, which cause mobidity and mortality. Transmission is via milk, blood, saliva, and semen. Because no vaccine is available, antibodies are used for screening. Only 7.5% of the dairy operations had independently confirmed the presence of BLV in the year prior to gov't screening.

    There is bad news and good news reported. The bad news from Wikipedia . . .

    "Bovine leukemia virus (BLV) is a bovine virus closely related to HTLV-I, a human tumour virus."
    "The Human T-lymphotropic virus Type I (HTLV-1) is a human RNA retrovirus that causes T-cell leukemia and T-cell lymphoma in adults and may also be involved in certain demyelinating diseases."
    "Buehring et al (2003) detected antibodies against BLV p24 capsid antigen in 74% of human sera tested using Western blot . . ."

    But there is good news for humans reported on Wikipedia:

    "Natural infection of animals other than cattle and buffalo are rare, although many animals are susceptible to artificial infection. After artificial infection of sheep most animals succumb to leukemia. Rabbits get a fatal AIDS like disease similar to rabbit-snuffles, different from the benign human snuffles. But it is not known whether this naturally occurring rabbit disease is linked to BLV infection. "Although several species can be infected by inoculation of the virus, natural infection occurs only in cattle (Bos taurus and Bos indicus), water buffaloes, and capybaras. Sheep are very susceptible to experimental inoculation and develop tumours more often and at a younger age than cattle. A persistent antibody response can also be detected after experimental infection in deer, rabbits, rats, guinea-pigs, cats, dogs, sheep, rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, antelopes, pigs, goats and buffaloes."

    "Some long term studies may be necessary, as there appears to be a correlation in instances of cancer among butchers and slaughterhouse workers. "Several studies have been carried out in an attempt to determine whether BLV causes disease in humans, especially through the consumption of milk from infected cows. There is, however, no conclusive evidence of transmission, and it is now generally thought that BLV is not a hazard to humans."

    If there is no conclusive evidence of transmission, one wonders why 74% of human sera tested positive. But one of the references cited in Wikipedia may cancel some of the good news anyway . . .

    http://www.cellscience.com/Reviews5/...ents_Meat.html

    "BLV has been shown to be present in unpasteurized milk and colostrom from infected cows . . . BLV infects human and simian cells in vitro, and causes erythroleukemia in chimpanzees."

    Well, thank God we humans are not chimpanzees!

    Next, maybe we can look at bovine papilloma virus (BPV), present in 50% of cattle.

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

    "BPV-1 and BPV-2 can also induce sarcomas and fibrosarcomas in other mammals, including equids (equine sarcoid) and, experimentally, rabbits, hamsters and mice."

    But surely not humans!?
    this study fails to differentiate between factory dairy and pastured grass fed dairy. Do you believe Walmart commercial beef to be as healthy as grass fed pastured beef? Just as you get healthy meat from healthy cows so to do you get healthy milk from healthy cows. Where is the study on BLV in humans? Where is the study that people drinking raw milk have higher incidences of Leukemia? Again these are arguments against factory processing of food and not the consumption of dairy.

    Oh yeah BLV is found in commerically sold beef as well!

    Comment


    • Does grass feeding kill bovine leukemia virus? If you refer to the source data, it appears that BLV is on the increase. And raw dairy is becoming fashionable and seems like an especially easy way of transmitting BLV from cow to human. Meat may have BLV, but I don't eat meat without cooking it thoroughly.

      Does bovine leukemia virus cause human leukemia or lymphoma after humans become infected with it? Like the virus has proved to cause cancer in cows? I don't know. Maybe in 20 years someone will do a retrospective study to find out. Certainly not the National dairy Council or the USDA.

      What I have now is the option to opt out of the dairy or raw dairy group in that retrospective study. I opt out for a lot of reasons, maybe twenty, only one of which is BLV. If someone opts in, that is his or her choice.

      We all have to eat. Starvation means a relatively quick death. Cordain has sought to determine which foodstuffs are ideal for humans based on evolution over hundreds of thousands of years. Dairy is not one of them, but all any of us is doing is approximating as best we can. But we do need to eat, and we need things that we can readily get and eat in real life, now. I understand and respect Sisson's equivocal inclusion of dairy in his Primal equation because I think a fairly limited number of people are willing to eschew dairy, and it is not as bad as other things that he rightfully denounces in his triage approach. I understand and respect Cordain's rejection of dairy based on its absence during critical times in human evolution, and based on his focus on the pathogenesis of autoimmune disease. And given the convenience and abundance, and inexpensive nature of dairy, I understand why some Primal enthusiasts continue to utilize it. One thing we all agree upon is that we need to eat something or starve.
      Last edited by Paleo Man; 07-12-2010, 10:04 PM.

      Comment


      • As I understand it BLV is in pastured products as well. Guess we need to all stop eating beef.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Paleo Man View Post
          Checking on my recollection on the high incidence of bovine leukemia virus in US dairy cattle.

          Here is a USDA Info Sheet from the National Animal Health Monitoring System . . .

          http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/dairy/da...y07_is_BLV.pdf

          In 2007 they tested milk from the bulk milk tanks of 534 dairy operations.

          Milk tested positive for bovine leukemia virus in 82.1% of the medium sized dairies, 83.2% of the small dairies, and 100% of the large dairies.

          Bovine leukemia virus is considered a bit of a nuisance in dairies because it causes malignant lymphoma and lymposarcoma in 1 to 5% of infected cows, per the fact sheet, which cause mobidity and mortality. Transmission is via milk, blood, saliva, and semen. Because no vaccine is available, antibodies are used for screening. Only 7.5% of the dairy operations had independently confirmed the presence of BLV in the year prior to gov't screening.

          There is bad news and good news reported. The bad news from Wikipedia . . .

          "Bovine leukemia virus (BLV) is a bovine virus closely related to HTLV-I, a human tumour virus."
          "The Human T-lymphotropic virus Type I (HTLV-1) is a human RNA retrovirus that causes T-cell leukemia and T-cell lymphoma in adults and may also be involved in certain demyelinating diseases."
          "Buehring et al (2003) detected antibodies against BLV p24 capsid antigen in 74% of human sera tested using Western blot . . ."

          But there is good news for humans reported on Wikipedia:

          "Natural infection of animals other than cattle and buffalo are rare, although many animals are susceptible to artificial infection. After artificial infection of sheep most animals succumb to leukemia. Rabbits get a fatal AIDS like disease similar to rabbit-snuffles, different from the benign human snuffles. But it is not known whether this naturally occurring rabbit disease is linked to BLV infection. "Although several species can be infected by inoculation of the virus, natural infection occurs only in cattle (Bos taurus and Bos indicus), water buffaloes, and capybaras. Sheep are very susceptible to experimental inoculation and develop tumours more often and at a younger age than cattle. A persistent antibody response can also be detected after experimental infection in deer, rabbits, rats, guinea-pigs, cats, dogs, sheep, rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, antelopes, pigs, goats and buffaloes."

          "Some long term studies may be necessary, as there appears to be a correlation in instances of cancer among butchers and slaughterhouse workers. "Several studies have been carried out in an attempt to determine whether BLV causes disease in humans, especially through the consumption of milk from infected cows. There is, however, no conclusive evidence of transmission, and it is now generally thought that BLV is not a hazard to humans."

          If there is no conclusive evidence of transmission, one wonders why 74% of human sera tested positive. But one of the references cited in Wikipedia may cancel some of the good news anyway . . .

          http://www.cellscience.com/Reviews5/...ents_Meat.html

          "BLV has been shown to be present in unpasteurized milk and colostrom from infected cows . . . BLV infects human and simian cells in vitro, and causes erythroleukemia in chimpanzees."

          Well, thank God we humans are not chimpanzees!

          Next, maybe we can look at bovine papilloma virus (BPV), present in 50% of cattle.

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

          "BPV-1 and BPV-2 can also induce sarcomas and fibrosarcomas in other mammals, including equids (equine sarcoid) and, experimentally, rabbits, hamsters and mice."

          But surely not humans!?
          how many of these studies on human-dairy consumption included people that ate lots of omega-6 and excessive grains? all of them. this is exactly how red meat got demonized in the first place.

          Comment


          • No need to stop eating pastured beef, Grol, unless you eat it raw. Cooking to 160 degrees F kills viruses nicely.

            I need to fess up to an error in my recollection regarding the incidence of paratuberculosis bacteria in dairy cattle. I incorrectly recalled that half of dairy cattle were infected with paratuberculosis. The correct recollection would have been that half of US dairy "herds" were infected with paratuberculosis.

            See the USDA fact sheet on this. The actual figure is 68.1 percent of herds infected with paratuberculosis, also known as Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) bacteria, sometimes known as Johne's disease in cattle. But the USDA says that the 68.1% figure is probably an underestimate, due to the difficulty in testing for this unique bacteria.

            http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/dairy/da..._is_Johnes.pdf


            A good brief article on the MAP bacteria can be found on Wikipedia . . .


            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycobac...ratuberculosis

            "MAP causes Johne's disease in cattle and other ruminants, and it has long been suspected as a causative agent in Crohn's disease in humans; this connection is controversial. Recent studies have shown that MAP present in milk can survive pasteurization, which has raised human health concerns due to the widespread nature of MAP in modern dairy herds. MAP survival during pasteurization is dependent on the D72C-value of the strains present and their concentration in milk. It is heat resistant and is capable of sequestering itself inside white blood cells, which may contribute to its persistence in milk. It has also been reported to survive chlorination in municipal water supplies. Even though MAP is hardy, it is slow growing and fastidious, which means it is difficult to culture. Many negative studies for MAP presence in living tissue, food, and water have used culture methods to determine whether the bacteria are present. Due to recent advances in our knowledge of the bacterium, some or all of these studies may need to be re-evaluated on the basis of culture methodology. MAP infections, like with most mycobacteria, are difficult to treat. It is not susceptible to antituberculosis drugs (which can generally kill Mycobacterium tuberculosis), but can only be treated with a combination of antibiotics such as rifabutin and a macrolide such as clarithromycin. Treatment regimens can last years."

            While there is controversy over whether MAP causes symptoms in humans similar to the symptoms it is known to cause in cows, IBS and Crohn's-like disorders, a number of studies have shown a much higher incidence of MAP infection in humans with Crohn's.

            http://www.paratuberculosis.net/25do...n_cd_patients/

            And as with the USDA estimates, those samplings of MAP bacteria are probably also underestimates due to the difficulty in testing for the bacteria.

            You can view a report from the American Academy of Microbiology . . .

            http://academy.asm.org/index.php?opt...-all&Itemid=79

            "MAP can survive standard milk pasteurization processes and has been identified in off-the-shelf milk in retail grocery stores in the U.S. and the European Union (E.U.). There is increasing concern that MAP can also be found in cheese made from the milk of MAP-infected cattle and meat from Johne’s diseased animals. These observations could provide the exposure route of CD patients to MAP."

            Standard US pasteurization temperatures are not quite high enough or sustained long enough to consistently kill all MAP bacteria, hence its presence in off-the-shelf milk. Not to mention the risk of raw dairy. But properly cooked beef should pose no threat.

            Just another of the "micronutrients" you can get with milk in addition to the cancer causing viruses.

            Comment


            • Does grass feeding kill bovine leukemia virus? If you refer to the source data, it appears that BLV is on the increase. And raw dairy is becoming fashionable and seems like an especially easy way of transmitting BLV from cow to human. Meat may have BLV, but I don't eat meat without cooking it thoroughly.

              Does bovine leukemia virus cause human leukemia or lymphoma after humans become infected with it? Like the virus has proved to cause cancer in cows? I don't know. Maybe in 20 years someone will do a retrospective study to find out. Certainly not the National dairy Council or the USDA.

              What I have now is the option to opt out of the dairy or raw dairy group in that retrospective study. I opt out for a lot of reasons, maybe twenty, only one of which is BLV. If someone opts in, that is his or her choice.
              Again if you are arguing against the conditions found in factory processing of food I am right there with you! Putting a whole bunch of genetically similar livestock with immuno-compromised systems from mass use of antibiotics and hormones, in disgusting conditions, give them a diet they are not evolutionarily adapted to, is just grounds for cancer/disease. This study does not in any way differentiate where the samples were taken from or what the conditions were in those places.

              We all have to eat. Starvation means a relatively quick death. Cordain has sought to determine which foodstuffs are ideal for humans based on evolution over hundreds of thousands of years. Dairy is not one of them, but all any of us is doing is approximating as best we can. But we do need to eat, and we need things that we can readily get and eat in real life, now. I understand and respect Sisson's equivocal inclusion of dairy in his Primal equation because I think a fairly limited number of people are willing to eschew dairy, and it is not as bad as other things that he rightfully denounces in his triage approach. I understand and respect Cordain's rejection of dairy based on its absence during critical times in human evolution, and based on his focus on the pathogenesis of autoimmune disease. And given the convenience and abundance, and inexpensive nature of dairy, I understand why some Primal enthusiasts continue to utilize it. One thing we all agree upon is that we need to eat something or starve.
              Does Cordain advocate that all meat be consumed at a temperature regulated by a thermometer like Grok must have done? After all BLV is found in meat, so is e-coli and other bacteria. Sorry I donít buy it. Veggies and fruit can carry pesticides, bacteria, nitrates, etc. Meat can be hosts to all kinds of nasty diseases and bacteria. Fish can be full of toxins, heavy metals, etc. Why is it dairy is singled out?

              The Masai are arguably the healthiest people in Africa. They consume a diet of about 60% butterfat and they are not getting cancer. The Swiss likewise. Even the French, who consume far more butter and cream than Americans, enjoy a comparatively lower cancer rate, obesity, heart disease, etc and they love to smoke!

              Comment


              • Responding to Doug and Imyers04. Part of the problem we face is trying to navigate through the realities of the modern world while holding on to important Primal and Paleo principles.

                I assume that during a lot of human evolution, meat was eaten raw. But I also assume that conditions in the wild were such that ruminants did not pass diseases back and forth to each other quite as freely as confined feedlot or small pasture cattle do. Paratuberculosis, for example, is transmitted from cow to cow when cow's explosive diarrhea, caused by the bacteria, contaminates the common feed, while they are in enclosured lots or pastures. Rather than living on the boundless open prairie.

                An example of what I am talking about is Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in deer and elk. This nasty mad-cow-disease like disorder was apparently originally caused decades ago by some human researchers in Colorado who confined deer in a pen with sick domestic sheep, and when the deer became sick also, the researchers turned them loose rather than euthanizing them. CWD has spread geographically from there and been transmitted by farmed game also. It is so insidious. Sick elk were kept on one pasture, then they were all killed and the pasture was cleaned and unused for five years. When elk were reintroduced to it after five years, they caught the disease and became sick also. That is how hardy the pathogen is. Temperatures of 1000 degrees F won't reliably kill the pathogen and it can take many years for the brain symptoms to develop after the exposure.

                There was a time when I would have considered deer and elk meat from the mountain west to be the healthiest meat available in North America. But there are now locations in Wyoming where random sampling of deer infected with CWD reveals an infection rate of 30%. So I simply don't eat deer or elk meat from anywhere with any incidence of CWD. Despite the assurances of the chambers of commerce and fish and game departments, whose funding depends on license fees and tourism, that CWD may not infect humans much.

                Fortunately, most meat does not contain CWD, and is only subject to pathogens that are killed by cooking. I've little doubt that many of the disease causing pathogens in ruminants these days are from human livestock handling practices. But the genie is now out of the bottle and can't be put back. So cooking makes sense.

                Avoiding meat that contains CWD is an example of how I've had to modify my Paleo preferences and practices to acknowledge modern realities. There are numerous reasons other than pathogens why I avoid dairy, but pathogens are in the mix.

                I doubt that even the most pristine Primal or Paleo lifestyle will protect us from the infectious diseases that I have been addressing lately in this thread, if we expose ourselves to the pathogens.

                Consider the Native Americans on the American frontier. Surely they were the ultimate hunter-gatherers, diets high in Omega 3, low in grains, etc. But they were wiped out, in many cases to the last man or woman, by infectious disease. If Paleo lifestyle would have protected anyone, it would have protected them. The best way to avoid infectious disease is to avoid exposure to the pathogens causing it.
                Last edited by Paleo Man; 07-13-2010, 11:03 AM.

                Comment


                • Hey guys, I have something that might interest everyone here and may benefit the Paleo world dramatically. Now please don't call me an idiot but this just came to mind and I've never read the PB so I might not have come across it.

                  If I was Grok and I killed an animal, for instance, a cow or dinosaur; and it was lactating, thus it must had milk? We would have happened to eat the whole carcass, and everyone does agree that Grok does not waste any bit of carcass, which would be including the udder. And remember, the cow that was hunted or dinosaur was lactating which means it has milk in the udder which meant that they probably consumed the milk too along with the animal. Doesn't this make sense?

                  It makes evolutionary sense to me to consume milk if this most likely happened because then it means that Grok must have been consuming milk, incidentally for millions of years! I don't know how you can avoid milk, if you kill an animal that is lactating, then it has milk in its udder and I would not waste it if I was grok as I think I find it really tasty "myself" and many of you guys too, whom would also drink raw milk. Right? We know a lactating dead cow still has milk, but I don't know if you can stimulate the teat to extract milk, but it was definitely still in there and you can cut it and milk would squirt around and gush out.

                  I don't think Grok would have thrown away any bit of the kill and that includes the udder as it incidentally, had this great tasting substance now called milk?

                  For the lactose intolerance, I think you just have to build tolerance and also have a great great source of clean raw milk which I have found today. Not having drank milk in a week, I drank a lot of this raw milk and I feel really good and not even bloated.

                  Anyone?
                  Last edited by Ernst; 07-20-2010, 02:16 AM. Reason: Grammar KING!!!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by cillakat View Post
                    Many Americans favor high fat, high salt and high calorie foods like Big Macs or Ben and Jerry's ice cream or any number of candies but it's certainly flawed in the most obvious of ways to say that they're biologically appropriate foods and were part of an environment of evolutionary adaptation simply because we crave them.
                    I think that is flawed reasoning. Just because some cravings might be more about food preference than nutritional requirements, doesn't mean that all are. For instance, I crave water when I'm thirsty- does this mean water is not a biologically appropriate substance to consume in response to that craving?

                    Same goes for fat. Just because we loooooove it and crave it and will do much to get additional free fats in our diet doesnt mean it would have been available to us in most places in the world. There was simply an evolutionary advantage to *crave* it - especially in an environment where food had the potential to be scarce sometimes- or always.
                    That is merely paleo-speculation. I see absolutely no reason to believe hunter gatherers didn't have large amounts of fat available to them, or that they wouldn't have eaten it when the oppertunity presented itself.

                    When you consider that large amounts of carbohydrate or large amounts of protein have adverse affects on our bodies and couple that with the lack of evidence demonstrating similar effects from eating saturated fat -as well as the evidence showing it's positive effects- then it seems only reasonable to conclude that a diet rich in saturated fat is biologically appropriate.


                    Sorry for bumping an old thread, just felt the need to reply to this for some reason.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X