[QUOTE=sbhikes;1111146]When I was a kid, milk at the restaurant we went to on Sundays was always soooo much better than any other milk. I think it was because it was because it was full-fat and really cold. This was back in the early 70s.[/QUOTE]
This stuff was in little individual cartons that were delivered every morning (along with individually packaged lunches) and left stacked on trays (unrefridgerated) until lunch time. It wasn't cold. I have no idea how fatty it was but considering that this was a fairly affluent middle class neighborhood school it was probably 2%.
"They state that lower-calorie flavored milk would particularly benefit school children who, according to IDFA and NMPF, are more inclined to drink flavored milk than unflavored milk at school," the FDA wrote in its notice.[/QUOTE]
So...excuse my ignorance...but what they're saying is that artificially sweetened milk is healthier than naturally sweetened milk because it would be lower in calories? Meaning aspartame is healthier than plain old sugar because of the lower calorie content?
I see zero evidence - zero - that plain old sugar is unhealthy. All I have seen - EVER - is that processed foods that are unhealthy tend to be high in sugar, making it a correlation, not a causation. Salt suffers from the same black eye. Calling cake unhealthy because it contains sugar is a lot like calling a Big Mac unhealthy because it contains red meat. Isn't that what people with agendas do? Sure, sugar is unhealthy if you consume more than your body can handle in a sitting, but that goes for EVERYTHING including water, air and sunlight.
A high calorie diet can be much healthier than a low calorie diet. A diet rich in butter, eggs, beef and potatoes consumed in a caloric surplus would make you overweight, but it'll be MUCH healthier than an underweight individual starving themselves on a diet of Lean Pockets, bagels and fat free cream cheese. Good God. You can be chubby and healthy and you can be ripped and a ticking timebomb.
There is a correction to the article.
Aspartame is [i]already[/i] allowed in milk and milk products. The dairy industry just wants to be able to remove the labeling requirement that says the milk has aspartame in it. eKatherine is onto something when she enjoyed sweet milk but not plain home milk. My guess is that the dairy industry is losing out to the sweet taste of Coke. They want kids to get addicted to the taste of sweet milk to compete with Coke. Harried mothers, will buy the milk not realizing that the milk has sweetener in it.
I think it's backwards. We need MORE labeling, not less.
[QUOTE=PrimalHunter;1111012]The dairy industry wants to [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business"]put aspartame in milk[/URL]. Unfortunately, I can see it becoming a huge hit.[/QUOTE]
The dairy industry wants to sell more milk, of course. Aspartame is bad for your health, especially for a childs. Send you child real mild from home, preferably raw, in a thermos.
Why would anyone want sweetened milk? I don't understand. It ceases to taste like milk at that point.
I'm trying to start drinking milk again. I want to gain more muscle, and what better way to do that than moo juice? This is what I've been buying.
I live in PA, and raw milk is available but very rare and incredibly expensive. Plus, it makes me ridiculously gassy. This stuff still isn't cheap - $4.69/half gal at Whole Foods - but oh my God. It is fantastic. Easily the best milk I've ever tasted. So crisp, so clean, so refreshing, so creamy. Why would ANYONE want to ruin it by dumping crap into it?
Although this is outrageously good with chocolate protein powder...HNGGGGG.
Goat milk is pretty fantastic as well. I wish that would get more popular in the US.
[QUOTE=ChocoTaco369;1111350]Why would anyone want sweetened milk? I don't understand. It ceases to taste like milk at that point.[/QUOTE]
I can remember as a kid, a long long time ago...shortly after the invention (discovery, whatever) of fire I think, on the rare occasion we would put some sugar and vanilla in our milk. I am not so sure our Mom ever knew, but I am also not so sure where we would have gotten the idea on our own either, unless we got it from watching her bake, or when we use to watch them make icecream or something.
For the last 5 years or so I have instructed the woman that take cares of my two kids to put Splenda in their milk because they drink more of it that way, and they have less desire for other sugary drinks! But of course, it would be wrong not to label it if aspartame is added to milk; everybody should have the right to choose for themselves and their kids.
Processed sugar is not that healthy in my opinion, especially when added to drinks, and to people not that physically active, because of high amounts of fructose, but also because it increases demands of micronutrients etc., so better to limit it. My household uses a mixture of ordinary sugar and Stevia, and this also reduces the total amount of fructose, but I see no reason to ban it completely though…
What is the point?
If its to make people drink more, that is dumb. No-one needs to drink milk by the glass full, even children.
Milk is probably the best drink to grow up on, kids should drink plenty of milk, and I used to drink around a half gallon myself at the age of twelwe and almost a gallon when I was seventeen...
Cows milk is for cows.
My children were breastfed till 3 and 2, I would have liked to go longer for the the second, both in fact really but my own selfishness caused me to wean him early.
They get plenty of nutrition from food, plus dairy upsets my youngest stomach anyway.
Why do you think kids need plenty of cows milk gorbag?
Whats wrong with breast milk? After they wean, which really should be much later than I fed mine, they don't need milk anymore.