Harvard study: Pasteurized milk from industrial dairies linked to cancer ..where's the swat team?

FAKE hmmmm?
Harvard School of Public Health

Possible Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer
High levels of galactose, a sugar released by the digestion of lactose in milk, have been studied as possibly damaging to the ovaries and leading to ovarian cancer. Although such associations have not been reported in all studies, there may be potential harm in consuming high amounts of lactose. A recent pooled analysis of 12 prospective cohort studies, which included more than 500,000 women, found that women with high intakes of lactose—equivalent to that found in 3 cups of milk per day—had a modestly higher risk of ovarian cancer, compared to women with the lowest lactose intakes. (15) The study did not find any association between overall milk or dairy product intake and ovarian cancer. Some researchers have hypothesized, however, that modern industrial milk production practices have changed milk's hormone composition in ways that could increase the risk of ovarian and other hormone-related cancers. (16) More research is needed.

Probable Increased Risk of Prostate Cancer
A diet high in calcium has been implicated as a probable risk factor for prostate cancer. (17) In a Harvard study of male health professionals, men who drank two or more glasses of milk a day were almost twice as likely to develop advanced prostate cancer as those who didn't drink milk at all. (18) The association appears to be with calcium itself, rather than with dairy products in general: A more recent analysis of the Harvard study participants found that men with the highest calcium intake—at least 2,000 milligrams a day—had nearly double the risk of developing fatal prostate cancer as those who had the lowest intake (less than 500 milligrams per day). (19)

Clearly, although more research is needed, we cannot be confident that high milk or calcium intake is safe.

www.hsph.harvard.edu...

oh here are the references:

14. Manson JE, Hsia J, Johnson KC, et al. Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349:523–34.

15. Genkinger JM, Hunter DJ, Spiegelman D, et al. Dairy products and ovarian cancer: a pooled analysis of 12 cohort studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006; 15:364–72.

16. Ganmaa D, Sato A. The possible role of female sex hormones in milk from pregnant cows in the development of breast, ovarian, and corpus uteri cancers. Med Hypotheses. 2005; 65:1028–37.

17. World Cancer Research Fund, American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer: a global perspective. Washington DC: AICR, 2007.

18. Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Wolk A, et al. Calcium and fructose intake in relation to risk of prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 1998; 58:442–447.

19. Giovannucci E, Liu Y, Platz EA, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC. Risk factors for prostate cancer incidence and progression in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. International Journal of Cancer. 2007; 121:1571–78.

20. Larsson SC, Bergkvist L, Rutegard J, Giovannucci E, Wolk A. Calcium and dairy food intakes are inversely associated with colorectal cancer risk in the Cohort of Swedish Men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006; 83:667–73; quiz 728–29.

21. Cho E, Smith-Warner SA, Spiegelman D, et al. Dairy foods, calcium, and colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of 10 cohort studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96:1015–22.

22. Martinez ME, Willett WC. Calcium, vitamin D, and colorectal cancer: a review of the epidemiologic evidence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers. Prev 1998; 7:163–68.

23. Hyman J, Baron JA, Dain BJ, et al. Dietary and supplemental calcium and the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1998; 7:291–95.

24. Dickinson HO, Nicolson DJ, Cook JV, et al. Calcium supplementation for the management of primary hypertension in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006:CD004639.

25. Cappuccio FP, Elliott P, Allender PS, Pryer J, Follman DA, Cutler JA. Epidemiologic association between dietary calcium intake and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of published data. Am J Epidemiol. 1995; 142:935–45.

26. Bolland MJ, Avenell A, Baron JA, Grey A, MacLennan GS, Gamble GD, Reid IR. Effect of calcium supplements on risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular events: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2010; 341:c3691. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3691.

www.hsph.harvard.edu...

FAKE!!!!???
do you see the doctor's name in the reference list
"Ganmaa D"
look closely now.
number 16 for the mathmatically astute

There's a lot bad with milk. There are good points to milk too but you have to evolve to using it and that takes many generations to do. We rushed it. I'm of Finnish descent, and Finns have been drinking milk for many generations as adults on a limited basis. I;m allergic to milk because I drank too much milk and ate too much ice cream when I was a kid. My uncle drove an ice cream truck and we got the outdated stuff for free. Oh well, my kids are allergic also and some of my grandchildren. Moderation is the cue, I learned the hard way. Pasteurization isn't as bad as Homogenization is. Homogenization breaks apart the cells of the milk and this releases the contents of the cells all at one time. The only benefit from this is you don't have to shake the carton. Pasteurization at least has a reason.

Feeding more Soy to the cows increases the Estrogen's in the cows food and increases the hormone in the milk. Sure Monsanto is going to fight this, it hurts his pocketbook. That's called Motive in a court of law. Proof? There is lots of proof including Monsanto's donation to scientific organizations and politicians. So now we have established intent. Our government is afraid of what would happen if they were to challenge him. He has influence on of much of the food chemistry used in this country and has a product that deters pests increasing production. Prove it's poisonous, it's not poisonous, it's mildly toxic and not poisonous. Soy is mildly toxic on it's own so it just boosts it's toxicity up farther by strengthening the plants defense system. Now I've strayed into soy milk where I don't belong.

Organic milk is much better for you than Commercial milk and fresh organic milk is better for you than processed but the Listeria can raise hell with some people and it is present in the soils at most farms. There are other microbes at every farm that some people can get sick from. I think My body doesn't like Lactobacilli any more because of an overgrowth when I was young. They are needed for proper digestion of milk.

My articles always get so long and boring. I gotta find a way to spice them up.

and here we have answers.com quoting more studies from the Dr and others

....In the United States, skim milk (as opposed to whole or two percent milk) has the lowest levels of hormones. That's not surprising because hormones are fat soluble. In this respect, skim milk is much like milk in Mongolia where cows are milked for only five months a year and not in the late stages of their pregnancy. Another of Dr. Davaasambuu's studies showed increased hormone levels among Mongolian third-graders after a month of drinking commercial milk from the United States.
Among women, milk consumption has been associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer in both the Nurses' Health Study and in a 2005 study from Sweden's Karolinska Institute. (On the other hand, 2002 data from the Nurses' Health Study showed that the more low-fat dairy products premenopausal women consumed, the lower their breast cancer risk. This didn't hold true for post-menopausal women, and the lower risk among pre-menopausal women didn't continue after they reached menopause.)
Organic milk is better in many respects than conventional milk but still may be full of natural hormones. My advice: cut down on dairy products except low-fat ones. Substitute soy milk for cow's milk when possible

wiki.answers.com...

reply to post by rickymouse

Boring?
I read it, I liked it

truth is very spicey

reply to post by Danbones


I'll say, it sure is. They are coming out of the woodwork.
You struck a nerve somewhere bro.

The longer milk takes to breakdown then how does that effect its digestability I wonder?

Pasteurization (or pasteurisation, see spelling differences) is a process of heating a food, usually a liquid, to a specific temperature for a definite length of time and then cooling it immediately. This process slows spoilage due to microbial growth in the food.

Unlike sterilization, pasteurization is not intended to kill all micro-organisms in the food. Instead, it aims to reduce the number of viable pathogens so they are unlikely to cause disease (assuming the pasteurized product is stored as indicated and is consumed before its expiration date). Commercial-scale sterilization of food is not common because it adversely affects the taste and quality of the product. Certain foods, such as dairy products, may be superheated to ensure pathogenic microbes are destroyed.[1]

It is the main reason for milk's extended shelf life. High-temperature, short-time (HTST) pasteurized milk typically has a refrigerated shelf life of two to three weeks, whereas ultra-pasteurized milk can last much longer, sometimes two to three months. When ultra-heat treatment (UHT) is combined with sterile handling and container technology (such as aseptic packaging), it can even be stored unrefrigerated for six to 9 months.

Pasteurization typically uses temperatures below boiling, since at very high temperatures, casein micelles will irreversibly aggregate, or "curdle". The two main types of pasteurization used today are: high-temperature, short-time (HTST and "extended shelf life" (ESL) treatment. Ultra-high temperature (UHT or ultra-heat-treated) is also used for milk treatment. In the HTST process, milk is forced between metal plates or through pipes heated on the outside by hot water, and is heated to 71.7°C (161°F) for 15–20 seconds. UHT processing holds the milk at a temperature of 135°C (275°F) for a minimum of one second. ESL milk has a microbial filtration step and lower temperatures than UHT milk.[5] Milk simply labeled "pasteurized" is usually treated with the HTST method, whereas milk labeled "ultra-pasteurized" or simply "UHT" has been treated with the UHT method. Since 2007, however, it is no longer a legal requirement in European countries (such as Germany) to declare ESL milk as ultra-heated, consequently, it is now often labeled as "fresh milk" and just advertised as having an "extended shelf life", making it increasingly difficult to distinguish ESL milk from traditionally pasteurized fresh milk. A less conventional but US FDA-legal alternative (typically for home pasteurization) is to heat milk at 145 °F (63 °C) for 30 minutes.[6]

Proponents of unpasteurized milk make the argument that if milk is obtained from humanely raised cows that are grass fed and handled hygienically, then there is little problem with disease.[7] However, raw milk can become contaminated in a number of ways: by coming into contact with cow feces or bacteria living on the skin of cows, from an infection of the cow's udder, or from dirty equipment, among others. Improperly handled raw milk is responsible for nearly three times more hospitalizations than any other foodborne disease outbreak, making it one of the world's most dangerous food products.

en.wikipedia.org...

It seems like pasturization has lots of subtle effects..like allowing certain things to survive digestion and to sometimes trip the immune system.

Milk is a hormonal delivery system. When homogenized, milk becomes very powerful and efficient at bypassing normal digestive processes and delivering steroid and protein hormones to the human body (both your hormones and the cow's natural hormones and the ones they may have been injected with to produce more milk).

Homogenization makes fat molecules in milk smaller and they become "capsules" for substances that are able to bypass digestion. Proteins that would normally be digested in the stomach are not broken down and instead they are absorbed into the bloodstream.

The homogenization process breaks up an enzyme in milk which in its smaller state can then enter the bloodstream and react against arterial walls. This causes the body to protect the area with a layer of cholesterol. If this only happened once in a while it wouldn't be of big concern, but if it happens regularly there are long term risks.

Proteins were created to be easily broken down by digestive processes. Homogenization disrupts this and insures their survival so that they enter the bloodstream. Many times the body reacts to foreign proteins by producing histamines, and then mucus. Sometimes homogenized milk proteins resemble a human protein and can become triggers for autoimmune diseases such as diabetes or multiple sclerosis.

Two Connecticut cardiologists have demonstrated that homogenized milk proteins did in fact survive digestion. It was discovered that Bovine Xanthene Oxidase (BXO) survived long enough to affect every one of three hundred heart attack victims over a five-year time period. Even young children in the U.S. are showing signs of hardening of the arteries.

www.naturalnews.com...


yummy heart disease!!! get me the lipitor!

FDA adds diabetes, memory loss warnings to statins....Lipitor, which became available late last year in generic form as atorvastatin, is the world's all-time biggest selling prescription medicine with cumulative sales in excess of $130 billion. As a class, statins have helped enrich the world's largest drugmakers, but most of the major brands are now prescribed as far cheaper generic medicines.

Last year, more than 20 million Americans were taking some form of statin, according to IMS Health.
...The FDA said it was aware of studies in which some patients taking statins may have a small increased risk of higher blood sugar levels and of being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.

The statin labels will also now reflect reports of certain cognitive effects such as memory loss and confusion experienced by some patients taking the drugs, the agency said. It said those reports generally have not been serious and the symptoms were reversed by stopping use of the statin

www.reuters.com...

I guess one thing leads to another...and corporate profits are the result at every turn

reply to post by WanderingThe3rd


I"M SORRY?

you guys dont even know what you're looking for, that artical has not been approved to be published hense why its not on PubMed.

BUT BOYS AND GIRLS, ONE I CAN FIND ON PUBMED, PUBLISHED, BY THE SAME PERSON, says there is NOTTING TO WORRY ABOUT if you know how to read that is

sooo lets pull put one of Ganmaa D articals about milk that DID get published.


Milk, dairy intake and risk of endometrial cancer: A 26-year follow-up.
HMMMMMMMMM
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

AND WHAT DOES IT SAY?

The multivariate relative risks (RRs) of adenocarcinoma of the endometrium across categories of cumulatively averaged total dairy consumption compared with < 1 svg/day were: 0.94 (95% CI = 0.71-1.25) for 1-1.4 svg/day, 1.14 (0.87-1.49) for 1.5-1.9 svg/day, 1.10 (0.84-1.44) for 2-2.9 svg/day, 1.26 (0.94-1.70) for ≥ 3 svg/day (p for trend = 0.06). The association between total dairy intake and endometrial cancer was significant only among the postmenopausal women (for ≥ 3 svg/day RR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.01-1.98, p for trend = 0.02) and was evident only among those who were not currently using hormone therapy (RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.05-2.36, p for trend = 0.003)

the numbers i bolded are the ones of importance, if the number i bolded isn't lower or higher then the next two numbers ( THEN ITS PERFECTLY NORMAL ) Get it?... every single one is right in the middle. so what this study goes on saying is that all readings were perfectly normal and inside the norm after the dairy consumption, and the study doesn't even tell if there were fat people in the groups (which can drastically effect a study like this) and so on

sooo for anyone that doesn't know how to read this, it basically says in the study there were no findings or readings outside of norm to worry about. everything is fine, you would have to drink milk and only milk for years just to be at a HIGHER LEVEL THEN 1, of developing this cancer

ohhhh wait and the artical goes on to say???

Total dairy intake was not significantly associated with risk of preinvasive endometrial cancer




ohhh rats... you guys need to stop falling into the fear of catchy titles. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH

ohh shooot, CHECK your turn.

and if it hasn't been published dont bother posting it please

Endometrial cancer refers to several types of malignancies that arise from the endometrium, or lining, of the uterus
Endometrial cancer may sometimes be referred to as uterine cancer. However, different cancers may develop not only from the endometrium itself but also from other tissues of the uterus, including cervical cancer, sarcoma of the myometrium, and trophoblastic disease.

en.wikipedia.org...

hmmm
Doesn't seem to be related to anything specific on this thread
There are many other types of implications posted as possible outcomes from the stated product..
You appear to be doing the old strawman apples and oranges thing ..
I see you didn't quote a post that claims that form of disease specifically is a result of commercial milk production practices, or SWAT team raids, for distributing a healthy alternative to what might be dangerous corporofacsist practices.

???????????????
???????????????
?????????????

MODSSS, this artical is FAKE


do some reasearch, this doctor doesn't exist and the only paper he ever realsed was from china

Ganmaa Davaasambuu, a Mongolia-trained medical doctor, a Japan-trained Ph.D. in environmental health, and a current fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study: 'The milk we drink today may not be nature's perfect food.' (Staff photo Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard News Office)

Hormones in milk can be dangerous
By Corydon Ireland
Harvard News Office


Ganmaa Davaasambuu is a physician (Mongolia), a Ph.D. in environmental health (Japan), a fellow (Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study), and a working scientist (Harvard School of Public Health).

news.harvard.edu...
there is a nice pic of the Lady...shes kinda hot
Im not sure what you are trying to claim 3rd, but you have already impeached your self
HARVARD and the good doctress have queened you

reply to post by WanderingThe3rd

from the above link

"The dairy industry in the United States is not going to change in any radical way," said artist Shimon Attie, the Mildred Londa Weisman Fellow at Radcliffe - and a former dairyman.

But in the meantime, he had a suggestion for the coffee setting at future Radcliffe Fellows luncheons: a pot of nondairy creamer.

news.harvard.edu...

Reply to post by JibbyJedi

Do not forget about tobacco and alcohol. Those are A-OK even though both cause numerous deaths daily. And then there is Big Pharma....yeah, it is crystal clear what TPTB are doing. But no one seems to care....


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by DoNotForgetMe


well, this thread is in a backhand way promoting milk in the same way as the ol skulls in the ice cubes magazine ads of the 60s did...by appealing to the latent death wish...