A1 Vs A2 Milk - Is The Devil Really In The Milk?

[cliff]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

by the way I just gave that anecdote because i think depriving kids of milk because it's a1 is Idiotic. I'm fairly certain I would have been worse off without the milk.

How would you feel if you knew the milk you're handing to your child increases his risk of juvenile diabetes manyfold ?

let's see the evidence

 

[cliff]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

nothing in that video disputes the study i posted

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

Ray Peat himself studied milk in great detail for a very long time and I would be very surprised if he had not looked at A1 and A2 in detail.

Hi Ketllebell,

no offense taken

The fact with the A2 published studies is they were trafficked and Keith found out later on about it, after they were published.

What they did is in order to mask any deleterious affect by A1 milk in the experiences, they fed BOTH experience and control groups with A1 , but never revealed it in the protocol.

Keith develops the story on many pages in his book.

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

nothing in that video disputes the study i posted

"You can lead the horse to the water, but you can't make him drink"

 

[cliff]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

"The three paragraphs under 'Epidemiology' in KB Woodford's long letter discuss which of several between-country studies are likely to be more reliable. He favours those published by originators of the A1/A2 hypothesis. I favour others that have included more countries (including the Netherlands and Ireland) and FAO food consumption data. As I wrote 'There is more uncertainty with national figures for A1 beta casein than for total milk casein and more uncertainties for these than for average milk consumption.' For infants consumption (considered with type 1 diabetes) there are the special problems that infant formulas usually contain increased whey and reduced casein and the milk protein used for their manufacture does not always come from within the country where the formulas are consumed.

Correlation studies of national food intake against chronic diseases have been notoriously unreliable in nutrition research (and I gave some classic examples).

Answering the next paragraph Milk chemistry & pharmacology, there are, as I wrote, reports that BCM-7 can be released from cows milk A1 beta casein by IN VITRO digestion with three enzymes. But, I have not yet seen clear evidence that this peptide is released and active in humans in vivo. See for example Svedberg et al. (1985) found peptides in the human small intestine after 1 l of bovine milk that reacted immunologically as if beta-casomorphin 7 but it did not show opioid activity or behave chromatographically as authentic beta-casomorphin-7. Effects in animals, injecting pure BCM-7 does not establish that this would happen when humans drink milk.

Answering the next paragraph Animal studies, first, the single, rabbit experiment was not a realistic model for human atherosclerosis, as I wrote. 'The experiment was of very short duration, diet groups were very small, the diets were very far from a rabbit's natural diet, early fatty streaks are different from human atherosclerosis and the lesions were not read blind as to the diet group.'

Then with the rats (BB) and mice (NOD) genetically liable to develop diabetes, any reader of the literature must surely take the findings of experienced researchers in Ottawa, London (England) and Auckland as the latest (perhaps the final) word on the subject. In Ottawa and London there was no significant difference in diabetes between the A1 and A2 milk groups.

If milk containing A1 beta casein has adverse effects on coronary heart disease, since milks in most developed countries contain substantial amounts of the beta-casein variant, it would be expected that people who drink more milk would be more likely to experience coronary heart disease. Elwood's collection of published prospective studies (including their own) shows that this has not happened.

AJ Allison and AJ Clarke's letter from A2 corporation makes many of the same points as Woodford. They also discuss hypothetical links between A1 consumption and autism and schizophrenia. I have seen the paper they quote of a trial of (combined) casein- and gluten-free diet in autistic children. The result did not seem to be clear cut and this is not, of course, direct evidence about A2 beta-casein. My review was not about autism or schizophrenia. I think the evidence relating either of these to bovine A1 or A2 beta-casein is even more unsubstantial than that for type 1 diabetes or coronary heart disease.

Professor Swinburn's review (referred to in Woodford's letter) was completed after I submitted my review to the EJCN. It was less complete than mine and has fewer references. Nevertheless Swinburn's bottom line, as I read it, is that there is insufficient overall evidence that either A1 or A2 milk has benefits over the other. Food Standards Australia and New Zealand on their website state that they do not believe the available information warrants any amendment to their Food Standards Code.

As this reply was originally drafted a paper has been published by Chin-Dusting et al. (2006), from the Baker Institute, Melbourne reporting double blind crossover human experiments with 25 g/day A1 beta casein compared with the same dose of A2 beta casein for 12 weeks each way. A large number of biochemical measurement and endothelial function tests and large artery property measurements were made in 24 subjects. None showed any significant difference between the two beta caseins and the authors conclude that there is no evidence from this large study that supplementation with casein A1 has any cardiovascular health disadvantage over consumption of casein A2.

Another piece of research by Venn et al. (2006) in New Zealand finds no difference in plasma cholesterols of 55 people between periods taking ordinary New Zealand milk and A2 milk.

In yet another recent paper Muntoni and Muntoni (2006) review changes in type 1 diabetes from 1961 to 2000 in 37 different populations. While the supply of milk has, they estimate, remained almost unchanged there has been a large increase in this type of diabetes (+3% per annum). Ordinary milk in these 28 different countries contains A1-beta-casein."

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

This is just another case of the 1970's laetrile studies with Sugiera and all; data manipulation in it's shamefully"s best...

 

[charlie]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

I will say this.

We are always quick to say, "Have you read Ray Peats work?" to anyone who comes and trys to dispute it. So I only think its fair that we say, "Have we read Kieths work" which is the book that he put out.

Looking at one little study here, and there, might not give the complete picture.

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

"The three paragraphs under 'Epidemiology' in KB Woodford's long letter discuss which of several between-country studies are likely to be more reliable. He favours those published by originators of the A1/A2 hypothesis. I favour others that have included more countries (including the Netherlands and Ireland) and FAO food consumption data. As I wrote 'There is more uncertainty with national figures for A1 beta casein than for total milk casein and more uncertainties for these than for average milk consumption.' For infants consumption (considered with type 1 diabetes) there are the special problems that infant formulas usually contain increased whey and reduced casein and the milk protein used for their manufacture does not always come from within the country where the formulas are consumed.

Correlation studies of national food intake against chronic diseases have been notoriously unreliable in nutrition research (and I gave some classic examples).

Answering the next paragraph Milk chemistry & pharmacology, there are, as I wrote, reports that BCM-7 can be released from cows milk A1 beta casein by IN VITRO digestion with three enzymes. But, I have not yet seen clear evidence that this peptide is released and active in humans in vivo. See for example Svedberg et al. (1985) found peptides in the human small intestine after 1 l of bovine milk that reacted immunologically as if beta-casomorphin 7 but it did not show opioid activity or behave chromatographically as authentic beta-casomorphin-7. Effects in animals, injecting pure BCM-7 does not establish that this would happen when humans drink milk.

Answering the next paragraph Animal studies, first, the single, rabbit experiment was not a realistic model for human atherosclerosis, as I wrote. 'The experiment was of very short duration, diet groups were very small, the diets were very far from a rabbit's natural diet, early fatty streaks are different from human atherosclerosis and the lesions were not read blind as to the diet group.'

Then with the rats (BB) and mice (NOD) genetically liable to develop diabetes, any reader of the literature must surely take the findings of experienced researchers in Ottawa, London (England) and Auckland as the latest (perhaps the final) word on the subject. In Ottawa and London there was no significant difference in diabetes between the A1 and A2 milk groups.

If milk containing A1 beta casein has adverse effects on coronary heart disease, since milks in most developed countries contain substantial amounts of the beta-casein variant, it would be expected that people who drink more milk would be more likely to experience coronary heart disease. Elwood's collection of published prospective studies (including their own) shows that this has not happened.

AJ Allison and AJ Clarke's letter from A2 corporation makes many of the same points as Woodford. They also discuss hypothetical links between A1 consumption and autism and schizophrenia. I have seen the paper they quote of a trial of (combined) casein- and gluten-free diet in autistic children. The result did not seem to be clear cut and this is not, of course, direct evidence about A2 beta-casein. My review was not about autism or schizophrenia. I think the evidence relating either of these to bovine A1 or A2 beta-casein is even more unsubstantial than that for type 1 diabetes or coronary heart disease.

Professor Swinburn's review (referred to in Woodford's letter) was completed after I submitted my review to the EJCN. It was less complete than mine and has fewer references. Nevertheless Swinburn's bottom line, as I read it, is that there is insufficient overall evidence that either A1 or A2 milk has benefits over the other. Food Standards Australia and New Zealand on their website state that they do not believe the available information warrants any amendment to their Food Standards Code.

As this reply was originally drafted a paper has been published by Chin-Dusting et al. (2006), from the Baker Institute, Melbourne reporting double blind crossover human experiments with 25 g/day A1 beta casein compared with the same dose of A2 beta casein for 12 weeks each way. A large number of biochemical measurement and endothelial function tests and large artery property measurements were made in 24 subjects. None showed any significant difference between the two beta caseins and the authors conclude that there is no evidence from this large study that supplementation with casein A1 has any cardiovascular health disadvantage over consumption of casein A2.

Another piece of research by Venn et al. (2006) in New Zealand finds no difference in plasma cholesterols of 55 people between periods taking ordinary New Zealand milk and A2 milk.

In yet another recent paper Muntoni and Muntoni (2006) review changes in type 1 diabetes from 1961 to 2000 in 37 different populations. While the supply of milk has, they estimate, remained almost unchanged there has been a large increase in this type of diabetes (+3% per annum). Ordinary milk in these 28 different countries contains A1-beta-casein."

All this is media damage control, and it's explained in the book.

Many people have been deceived by the clever editing of " White misschief", but i suppose that's why they broadcasted it.

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

It's clear we aren't going to agree here.

All i can say to people interested in this subject is buy Keith's book, you won't regret it.

 

[cliff]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

I don't need to read the book I've seen the actual evidence, I researched a2 milk pretty extensively a couple years ago. By the way I don't have to buy a book to read ray's work....

burt- Good luck with your conspiracy theories

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

burt- Good luck with your conspiracy theories

I can agree with you on this point: there's an A2 milk conspiracy going on.



If anyone wants to learn how one makes scientific articles say what they wish, read the book.

 

[cliff]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

matt lalonde posted this on facebook-
"The whole A2 versus A1 milk issue was a fabrication by New Zealand farmers who wanted to sell more milk fro their A2 producing cows. Anyone with basic chemistry and biochemistry knowledge can cut through the arguments that were provided by the A2 side. The original studies were in vitro and did not use the full spectrum of enzymes that human beings possess for digestion. Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV and Prolyl Endopeptidase have the ability to shred BCM7 to pieces. For more information see: (a) Teschemaker, H.; Umbach, M.; Hamel, U.; Praetorius, K.; Ahert-Hilder, G.; Brantl, V.; Lottspeich, F.; Henschen, A. J. No Evidence for the Presence of b-Casomorphins in Human Plasma After Ingestion of Cow’s Milk or Milk Products. Dairy Res. 1986, 53, 135–138. (b) Hill, J. P.; Crawford, R. A.; Boland, M. J. Milk and Consumer Health: A Review of the Evidence for a Relationship Between the Consumption of Beta Casein A1 with Heart Disease and Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus. Proc. NZ Soc. Animal Production 2002, 62, 111–114. (c) Truswell, A. S. The A2 Milk Case: A Critical Review. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2005, 59, 623–631. (d) Chin-Dusting, J.; Shennan, J.; Jones, E.; Williams, C.; Kingwell, B.; Dart, A. Effect of Dietary Supplementation with b-Casein A1 or A2 on Markers of Disease Development in Individuals at High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease. British Journal of Nutrition. 2006, 95, 136–144.................The effects of BMC7 are only manifested when the molecule is injected into human beings or lab animals. They do not manifest when the molecule is ingested. BMC7 is not detected in the guts of human beings when A1 milk is ingested. That is because of what I've mentioned earlier. The in vitro tests originally used to detect and isolate BMC7 did not have the full spectrum of human digestive enzymes. Human beings are fully capable of digesting BMC7. It is true that BMC7 is problematic when isolated from incomplete in vitro digestion and injected into human beings. However, there are no detrimental effects noted when A1 milk or BMC7 is ingested because human beings digest BMC7."

 

[shaadoe]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

I have read "Devil in the Milk" and the research is completely off the mark. Correlation does not equal causation and the evidence gathered in this book is not worth reading.
As Cliff mentioned earlier, Jersey milk is not a guarantee that you are getting A2 milk. I am able to get 100% grass fed Guernsey milk that is tested as A2 and I react worse to their milk then any other.
I have even tried pasteurizing it myself thinking it might be the specific cows bateria I was reacting to.

Honestly the added the vitamins should not be a reason not to buy or even worry about the milk you are drinking. A perfect quote from RP that I think sums it up pretty good is "find a milk that tastes good."

It is that simple IMHO

 

[charlie]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

Good post. Thank you shaadoe!

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

I have read "Devil in the Milk" and the research is completely off the mark. Correlation does not equal causation and the evidence gathered in this book is not worth reading.

Bold faced lie.

 

[Birdie]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

There are so many opinions and so many studies. I am just going along with Ray on this one because I like what he says and it makes sense to me.

It frees me up. I buy the milk I like. Easy.

There are so many foods we need to be careful of. Fruits too industrialized to be avoided. Orange juice jello to be made instead of packaged. Stock to go with meats. Certain eggs preferred. Getting the purest salt and sugar. Limiting starches. Cooking any leaves. It goes on and on. So, hooray for plain old milk.

 

[burtlancast]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

.....
AJ Allison and AJ Clarke's letter from A2 corporation makes many of the same points as Woodford. They also discuss hypothetical links between A1 consumption and autism and schizophrenia. I have seen the paper they quote of a trial of (combined) casein- and gluten-free diet in autistic children. The result did not seem to be clear cut and this is not, of course, direct evidence about A2 beta-casein. My review was not about autism or schizophrenia. I think the evidence relating either of these to bovine A1 or A2 beta-casein is even more unsubstantial than that for type 1 diabetes or coronary heart disease.

Professor Swinburn's review (referred to in Woodford's letter) was completed after I submitted my review to the EJCN. It was less complete than mine and has fewer references. Nevertheless Swinburn's bottom line, as I read it, is that there is insufficient overall evidence that either A1 or A2 milk has benefits over the other. Food Standards Australia and New Zealand on their website state that they do not believe the available information warrants any amendment to their Food Standards Code.

.....

Now, let's include the source of your copy and paste: http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.103 ... cn.1602454.

The author ?

STEWART TRUSWEL

Who is Truswell ?

He's "the senior professor of human nutrition in Australia, with publications going back to 1957" ( Fonterra's press release).

In fact, the guy has been his whole career the best "independent researcher" the industries could buy...

Exhibit A:
The saturated fats and cholesterol theory has been disproven right from the start it surfaced; today many mainstream cardiologists have embarassly given up on it...

Yet Truswell has argued for it relentlessly all these years, using of course distinguished scientific articles....

Here's some of his recommendations on fats, dating from june 2012 nonetheless:

Truswell says the new draft advice should read "replace" saturated and trans fats with unsaturated fats because 25 case controlled studies show these good unsaturated fats protect against heart disease.

..At issue is evidence showing while saturated fats such as butter and the fat on meat are bad for your heart, other fats such as sunflower, vegetable, olive and canola oil and omega 3 fats in fish such as salmon lower the risk of heart disease.

The contentious draft says Australians should "limit intake of foods and drinks containing saturated and trans fats" and "include small amounts of foods that contain unsaturated fats"....

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ding-says-expert/story-e6frg8y6-1226404694334


Exhibit B:

The multinational company FONTERRA has always argued against the A2 hypothesis in public.

What many people don't know is while badmouthing it, Fonterra owns A2 patents and has done everything to acquire A2 CORPORATION's own patents rights ( acquired well before their's) for detecting BCM7 .

In 2004, they dragged the A2 Corporation into courts in an attempt to oppose their genotyping patent.

Guess who their key external scientist was ?

Yes, ....STEWART TRUSWELL !!.

The courts rebutted them.

Milk safety debate expert paid by Fonterra.

A key figure in the milk-safety debate has admitted he was paid by Fonterra to act as an "independent" nutrition expert on the A1-A2 milk issue.

In 2005, University of Sydney Professor of Human Nutrition Stewart Truswell wrote what has become a much-quoted research paper concluding that any apparent evidence saying A2 milk had advantages over standard A1 milk - which is produced by Fonterra - was flawed.

But he did not disclose he had previously been paid as a consultant by Fonterra, nor that the giant dairy company had used him as a principal scientific witness in intellectual property legal hearings against the A2 Corporation, which owns the licences and patents for A2 milk.

Some scientists have since questioned parts of the evidence Truswell used to come to that conclusion on A2 milk, claiming one of the studies he quoted had been confounded because of the contamination of the milk fed to rats and mice.

They also say he ignored relevant evidence supporting the A2 case.

A2 milk does not have the protein in A1 milk that some link to type-1 diabetes, heart disease, autism, and Crohn's disease.

Last month, The Press emailed a series of questions to Truswell, asking if he had ever been paid by Fonterra for consultancy work or for research, why he continued using discredited evidence to show that A1 milk was apparently safe, and why he had never disclosed his conflicts of interest in working for Fonterra.

Truswell did not reply and did not return phone calls.

But in this month's issue of Dairy Exporter magazine, Truswell admits he was once on Fonterra's payroll as an independent expert in relation to A2 milk.

"Fonterra asked me to review the literature in early 2003 as an independent nutrition expert. They paid me at an agreed rate for my time spent on the work.

"I was going to be paid whatever I found.

"I had and have no special interest in A1 or A2 milk. I did not expect to have any further commercial reliance on Fonterra, so I cannot see that there was any financial inducement on me to conclude either way."

Lincoln University academic Professor Keith Woodford believes one of the fundamental principles in both business and science is that competing interests should always be disclosed.

In Truswell's article for the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (EJCN), based on the work he did for Fonterra, Truswell had presented himself as independent and from the University of Sydney.

"His review was very partisan and selective in the evidence he presented.

"If he had identified that he was a Fonterra consultant, and also an expert witness on their behalf in an unsuccessful attempt to overturn an A2 Corporation patent application, then what he wrote and the tone of it would have been subjected to some greater scrutiny.

"Also, it would have influenced other authors who have subsequently referred to what he wrote on the assumption that he was indeed an independent.

"And Andrew McKenzie of the NZFSA (New Zealand Food Safety Authority) would not have been able to refer on National Radio to Truswell's ECJN paper as a supposedly independent piece of work."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/174768/Milk-safety-debate-expert-paid-by-Fonterra


Exhibit C:

Truswell bases himself on the FAD trial , whose results did not support the A2 hypothesis: "any reader of the literature must surely take the findings of experienced researchers in Ottawa, London and Auckland as the latest ( perhaps the final) word on this subject."

This trial , sponsorized by the New Zealand Dairy Board ( NZDRI, who was to become a few years later the FONTERRA CORPORATION) involved 3 countries, began mid 2000 and it's results were published in the DIABETOLOGIA journal in july 2002.

But he fails to mention the company who supplied the regimen ( DRI, for Dairy Research Institute, part of the Fonterra corporation) knew even before the trial started that half the regimen administered, which consisted of progestimil, was in fact itself contaminated with BCM7, the peptide contained in A1 milk, and informed NZDRI through an internal document (october 2000) written by one of the scientists employed in the trial, JEREMY HILL.
Any further additions to this regimen of separate types of caseines ( A1 and A2), as it was done, could not yield any reliable and verifiable results thus.

This internal document ( containing many other extremely important findings) came into the possession of Howard Paterson ( the rich businessman who launched the A2 corporation but died shortly after) during his october 2000 meeting with Warren Larsen, chief executieve of the NZDRI, where he proposed for the first time NZDRI to start a joint-venture with his A2 Corporation to promote A2 milk worldwide .

The "White misschief" doc. relates the meetings in these terms:
PATERSON :

" I don't know if he had read it. I think if he had read it he certainly would not have given it to me. I mean, it's an extremely damaging document to Fonterra."

LARSEN:

" I had certainly read it. In fact i'm a little bit insulted to think that he would expect me to go to a meeting like that and not have read it."

This document came into the public arena thanks to the A2 corporation, who released it shortly after their relations with FONTERRA completely broke down.
The producers of the doc "White Misschief" chose to completely ignore it's content, thanks to some clever editing.

It's available in full in Keith's book.

Some well chosen extracts:

If the media (or A2 Corporation) were ever able to assemble the information
shown in this paper they could put an alarmist spin on the
whole area of milk consumption or alternatively leap to conclusions
about At vs A2 effects before a case is proven either way.
Taken in totality the contents of this briefing paper could form
the basis of an argument for the production of A2 milks and milk
products for at risk individuals. However, who may be at risk is still
unclear and a diagnostic or diagnostics is a priority. The presence of
beta-casomorphin-7 in urine holds some hope in this respect.
....
The background to this whole area originates from a phone conversation
between Bob Elliott and myself in 1993. Bob had phoned the
NZDRI and asked to speak with someone who knew something about
cows. Bob told me that he thought that casein might be triggering
diabetes and asked me if all cows were the same. Upon finding that
diabetes was an auto-immune disease and knowing that beta-casein
in milk released an immune reactive peptide and that there was a
difference in the sequence of this peptide in beta-casein At and A2,
I suggested to Bob that there might be a difference in the effect of
these types of casein on the development of diabetes, although at the
time I thought this to be an extremely long shot.
Under an NZDB funded project NZDRI supplied Al and A2
caseins. for Elliott to feed to diabetes-prone mice.
Only those mice fed Al developed diabetes.
...
... work by a German group showed that the bioactive peptide betacasomorphin-
7 (BCM-7) could only be released from Al type variants
(Al, Band C etc) and not A2 type variants (A2 and A3 etc).
This makes perfect mechanistic sense given the differences between
Aland A2 as the proline at position 67 in the A2 variant makes this
bond resistant to hydrolysis by digestive enzymes unlike the histidine
at this position in the Al variant.
....
To further investigate if Bob Elliott's feeding trial results could be
duplicated a large NZDB funded multi-laboratory multi-national
trial was performed- the Food and Diabetes (FAD) Trial. In this trial
coded diets supplied from the NZDRI were fed to diabetes-prone rats
and mice in Auckland (Elliott), Canada and the UK. Groups in Italy,
Germany, and the US also collaborated in the trial.
The effects observed by Elliott were not consistently repeated in
the FAD Trial and in fact were shown in only one case, in rats in the
Canadian laboratory.
....
Another important result from the trial was that [Pregestimil] also
produced high levels of diabetes. NZDRI has since shown that Pregestimil
contains a high amount of BCM-7. This result is not known
outside the NZ dairy industry and forms the basis of a confidential
NZDRI Report.

So, NZDRI knew the trial was worthless, they chose to go ahead with it, and Jeremy Hill signed the study and kept his mouth shut hoping no one would notice.

Fonterra hired Truswell to further discredit the A2 hypothesis, and he happily obliged (like he has done throughout his whole shamefull academic career) while ignoring any communication/ data transmitted by Woodford .

Further comments by Woodford himself:

A2 proponent hits back

Dear Editor, Comments by Professor Truswell regarding A1 and A2 milk in the November issue of the Dairy Exporter on page 24 require clarification.

Truswell presents as an apparently independent commentator. This leaves unsaid that he was also Fonterra's own external consultant employed to review the A1 and A2 issue some years back. This has been confirmed by Fonterra.

Also, Truswell was Fonterra's expert witness in their unsuccessful objection in 2004/05 to the A2 Corporation genotyping patent for the purpose of forming A2 herds.

One of the fundamental principles in both science and business is that competing interests should always be disclosed. In Truswell's case this has not occurred.

Truswell claims that any reader of the literature must surely take the findings of experienced researchers in Ottawa, London and Auckland as the latest [perhaps the final] word on the subject. Once again Truswell does not disclose all that needs to be disclosed. Truswell was referring to what is known as the FAD trial where rodents were fed A1 and A2 milk. The evidence from this trial supposedly only weakly supported previous research with mice undertaken by Professor Bob Elliott.
What Truswell chooses to ignore is that the A2 diets were seriously contaminated with BCM7, which is precisely the nasty peptide released from A1 beta-casein. This contamination was known to Dairy Research Institute (DRI), now Fonterra, scientists who supplied the diets long before publication of the results. The documentation is provided in my book, Devil in the Milk.

The details of the contamination are also in a confidential DRI report. One of its scientists who supplied the diets was even a co-author of the published paper in Diabetologia. But this contamination has never been publicly disclosed by the authors to the scientific community, although one author, not associated with Fonterra, has subsequently said he regrets being associated with this paper.

This is a huge issue of scientific ethics which at some stage Fonterra will have to address. Truswell is quoted in the Dairy Exporter as being critical of findings from a rabbit experiment with A1. Truswell's criticisms are not explicit in the Dairy Exporter. But elsewhere he has said that the investigators were not blinded as to which rabbits were receiving which treatment. Professor Julie Campbell has been very clear in communication with me that this is a falsehood.

Truswell has also been critical on the ground that rabbits are an unsuitable model. However, the facts are that rabbits are widely used as a model for investigating heart disease (I can find over 8000 publications referring to rabbits as a model for heart disease). Truswell claims that ?correlation studies of national food intake against chronic diseases were notoriously unreliable. However the Laugesen and Elliott data shows that for each of diabetes and heart disease, the chances of getting such a strong relationship by a fluke of the data are much less than one in 1000. But in any case, the strength of the A2 case rests not just on correlations but on the biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, animal trials, and human data.

Truswell is reported as saying that he has found no evidence that BCM7 was released during the digestive process into the gut of humans. That may be true for him. But other scientists have found it in the small intestine of humans, and it has also been found by several groups of scientists in the urine of autism sufferers.

One of the problems for farmers is to try and sort out the wheat from the chaff amongst apparently competing scientists. It is therefore relevant for dairy farmers to know that the two scientists who have been at the forefront of arguing against A2 (Professors Truswell and Jim Mann) have been the very same two scientists who in the past were Fonterra's external consultants in regard to A1/A2.

Keith Woodford, Professor of Farm Management and Agribusiness, Lincoln University

http://www.dairyexporter.co.nz/article/28313.html

Now,

I'm off to lunch...

 

[Jenn]

I milk my own goats and cows. The health of the animal is far more important that ANYTHING else as to the quality of the milk. What they are fed is second and goes back to how healthy the animal is. A healthy cow will clean up crap fed to it, an unhealthy cow will have some pass through.

The individual drinking the milk also has a lot do with digestibility. If you are not digesting it properly, it's a toxin...even if it's supposed to be good for you. I know people do better with one brand of milk over another or raw vs pasteurized and even vice versa. One year, I reacted to one cow's milk but not the other. I know people who can handle A1 milk over A2 milk....probably because of the health of the individual cow. IMO.

A1 or A2 status is way down on the bottom of my list for culling criteria. I won't test my animals. The A2 corporation contract you agree to by testing your animal reads like a Monsanto agreement.

 

[gretchen]

Re: What type of Milk do you use

I don't need to read the book I've seen the actual evidence, I researched a2 milk pretty extensively a couple years ago. By the way I don't have to buy a book to read ray's work....

burt- Good luck with your conspiracy theories

The "conspiracy" happens to be true. This last year of drinking A1 milk after not drinking it for 20 years was one of the worst of my life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW4s6Ku0XAc
Obviously the A1 people are LYING.

[mod]This post contains alternatives to Ray Peat's views. For a full explanation click here.[/mod]

 

[pboy]

my thirteenth year was pretty bad....it must have been the shoes I frequently wore that year