more heart attacks in milk drinkers

Briggs, R. "Myocardial Infarction in Patients Treated with
Sippy and other high Milk Diets,", Circulation, 21:538, 1960

Hartroft, W. "The Incidence of Coronary Heart Disease in
Patients Treated with the Sippy Diet" American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition, 15:205, 1964

2. DIABETES, AUTISM, SCHIZOPHRENIA milk antibodies in blood
of diabetic children

Dosch, Hans-Michael, "The Possible Link Between Insulin
Dependent (Juvenile) Diabetes Mellitus and Dietary Cow Milk"
Clin Biochem, Vol 26 pp 307-308 August 1993

Sun, ZJ, Cade JR, et al "Beta-casomorphin induces Fos-like
immunoreactivity in discrete brain regions relevant to
schizophrenia and autism" Autism March 1999 vol 3(1) 67-83

Sun, ZJ, Cade JR "A peptide found in schizophrenia and
autism causes behavioral changes in rats" Autism 1999 vol
3(1) 85-95

3. CANCER breast, ovarian, prostate, lung cancer all dairy

Westin, Jerome B. "Carcinogens in Israeli Milk: A Study in
Regulatory Failure" International Journal of Health
Services, Vol 23 No 3 pp. 497-517 1993 Baywood Publishing
Co. Inc.

4. ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES 30 to 80 different antibiotics cause
chronic resistant infections

5. PESTICIDE RESIDUES linked to cancer, chronic fatigue,

6. HORMONE RESIDUES menstrual problems, osteoporosis

Baldini, M, Coni, E. "Presence and Assessment of
Xenobiotic Substances in Milk and Dairy Products" Ann. Ist.
Super. Sanita Vol. 26, N. 2 (1990) pp 167-176

Mepham, TB Public health implication of bovine somatotrophin
use in dairying: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,
Vol 85 Dec1992 pp. 736-739

7. OSTEOPOROSIS National Dairy Council study shows bone loss
caused by milk drinking

Lovendale, M. " The Impact of Dairy Products on Human
Health, the Environment, and the National Budget" Advanced
Health Journal March 1993 No. 4, Advanced Health Center,
Monarch Beach, CA 92629

8. LEUKEMIA VIRUSES 20% of all cows carry leukemia viruses
that can infect humans

Ferrer, J. Milk of dairy cows frequently contains a
leukemogenic virus Science 213:1014 1981


Gerard J.W. Mackenzie J.W.A. Goluboff N. Cows Milk
Allergy: Prevalence and Manifestation in an Unselected
Series of Newborns Acta Paediatr Scand. Supplement 234 1973

and antibiotic residues

Info courtesy of M. M. Van Benschoten, OMD, CA



Breast Cancer

By Robert Cohen Executive Director Text Only

B = Breast Cancer

The following ten references provide converging lines of evidence that focus upon one central point.
There are hundreds of millions of different proteins in nature, and only one hormone that is identical between any two species. That powerful growth hormone is insulin-like growth factor, or IGF-I. IGF-I survives digestion and has been identified as the KEY FACTOR in breast cancer’s growth.

IGF-I is identical in human and cow.

If you believe that breast feeding “works” to protect lactoferrins and immunoglobulins from digestion (and benefit the nursing infant), you must also recognize that milk is a hormonal delivery system. By drinking cow’s milk, one delivers IGF-I in a bioactive form to the body’s cells. When IGF-I from cow’s milk alights upon an existing cancer…

“Human Insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I) and bovine IGF-I are identical. Both contain 70 amino acids in the identical sequence.”

Judith C. Juskevich and C. Greg Guyer. SCIENCE, vol. 249. August 24, 1990.

“IGF-I is critically involved in the aberrant growth of human breast cancer cells.”

M. Lippman. J. Natl. Inst. Health Res., 1991, 3.

“Estrogen regulation of IGF-I in breast cancer cells would support the hypothesis that IGF-I has a regulatory function in breast cancer.”

A.V. Lee, Mol-Cell- Endocrinol., March, 99(2).

“IGF-I is a potent growth factor for cellular proliferation in the human breast carcinoma cell line.”

J.C. Chen, J-Cell-Physiol., January, 1994, 158(1)

“Insulin-like growth factors are key factors for breast cancer growth.”

J.A. Figueroa, J-Cell-Physiol., Nov., 1993, 157(2)

“IGF-I produces a 10-fold increase in RNA levels of cancer cells. IGF-I appears to be a critical component in cellular proliferation.”

X.S. Li, Exp-Cell-Res., March, 1994, 211(1)

“IGF-I plays a major role in human breast cancer cell growth.”

E.A. Musgrove, Eur-J-Cancer, 29A (16), 1993

“IGF-I has been identified as a key factor in breast cancer.”

Hankinson. The Lancet, vol. 351. May 9, 1998

“Serum IGF-I levels increased significantly in milk drinkers, an increase of about 10% above baseline but was unchanged in the control group.”

Robert P. Heaney, Journal of the American Dietetic Association, vol. 99, no. 10. October 1999

“IGF-1 accelerates the growth of breast cancer cells.”

M. Lippman Science, Vol. 259, January 29, 1993

New York Times

While Warning About Fat, U.S. Pushes Cheese Sales

Katie Orlinsky for The New York Times

A government-created industry group worked with Domino’s Pizza to bolster sales by increasing the cheese on pies.

  • Domino’s Pizza was hurting early last year. Domestic sales had fallen, and a survey of big pizza chain customers left the company tied for the worst tasting pies.
From marketing campaigns, to restaurant menus to your own dinner plate, what evidence are you seeing of more cheese in the American diet? Share your experiences.

Then help arrived from an organization called Dairy Management. It teamed up with Domino’s to develop a new line of pizzas with 40 percent more cheese, and proceeded to devise and pay for a $12 millionmarketing campaign.

Consumers devoured the cheesier pizza, and sales soared by double digits. “This partnership is clearly working,” Brandon Solano, the Domino’s vice president for brand innovation, said in a statement to The New York Times.

But as healthy as this pizza has been for Domino’s, one slice contains as much as two-thirds of a day’s maximum recommended amount of saturated fat, which has been linked to heart disease and is high in calories.

And Dairy Management, which has made cheese its cause, is not a private business consultant. It is a marketing creation of theUnited States Department of Agriculture — the same agency at the center of a federal anti-obesity drive that discourages over-consumption of some of the very foods Dairy Management is vigorously promoting.

Urged on by government warnings about saturated fat, Americans have been moving toward low-fat milk for decades, leaving a surplus of whole milk and milk fat. Yet the government, through Dairy Management, is engaged in an effort to find ways to get dairy back into Americans’ diets, primarily through cheese.

Americans now eat an average of 33 pounds of cheese a year, nearly triple the 1970 rate. Cheese has become the largest source of saturated fat; an ounce of many cheeses contains as much saturated fat as a glass of whole milk.

When Michelle Obama implored restaurateurs in September to help fight obesity, she cited the proliferation of cheeseburgers and macaroni and cheese. “I want to challenge every restaurant to offer healthy menu options,” she told the National Restaurant Association’s annual meeting.

But in a series of confidential agreements approved by agriculture secretaries in both the Bush and Obama administrations, Dairy Management has worked with restaurants to expand their menus with cheese-laden products.

Consider the Taco Bell steak quesadilla, with cheddar, pepper jack, mozzarella and a creamy sauce. “The item used an average of eight times more cheese than other items on their menu,” the Agriculture Department said in a report, extolling Dairy Management’s work — without mentioning that the quesadilla has more than three-quarters of the daily recommended level of saturated fat and sodium.

Dairy Management, whose annual budget approaches $140 million, is largely financed by a government-mandated fee on the dairy industry. But it also receives several million dollars a year from the Agriculture Department, which appoints some of its board members, approves its marketing campaigns and major contracts and periodically reports to Congress on its work.

The organization’s activities, revealed through interviews and records, provide a stark example of inherent conflicts in the Agriculture Department’s historical roles as both marketer of agriculture products and America’s nutrition police.

In one instance, Dairy Management spent millions of dollars on research to support a national advertising campaign promoting the notion that people could lose weight by consuming more dairy products, records and interviews show. The campaign went on for four years, ending in 2007, even though other researchers — one paid by Dairy Management itself — found no such weight-loss benefits.

When the campaign was challenged as false, government lawyers defended it, saying the Agriculture Department “reviewed, approved and continually oversaw” the effort.

Dr. Walter C. Willett, chairman of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health and a former member of the federal government’s nutrition advisory committee, said: “The U.S.D.A. should not be involved in these programs that are promoting foods that we are consuming too much of already. A small amount of good-flavored cheese can be compatible with a healthy diet, but consumption in the U.S. is enormous and way beyond what is optimally healthy.”

The Agriculture Department declined to make top officials available for interviews for this article, and Dairy Management would not comment. In answering written questions, the department said that dairy promotion was intended to bolster farmers and rural economies, and that its oversight left Dairy Management’s board with “significant independence” in deciding how best to support those interests.

The department acknowledged that cheese is high in saturated fat, but said that lower milk consumption had made cheese an important source of calcium.

“When eaten in moderation and with attention to portion size, cheese can fit into a low-fat, healthy diet,” the department said.

In its reports to Congress, however, the Agriculture Department tallies Dairy Management’s successes in millions of pounds of cheese served.

In 2007, the department highlighted Pizza Hut’s Cheesy Bites pizza, Wendy’s “dual Double Melt sandwich concept,” and Burger King’s Cheesy Angus Bacon cheeseburger and TenderCrisp chicken sandwich. “Both featured two slices of American cheese, a slice of pepper jack and a cheesy sauce,” the department said.

These efforts, the department reported, helped generate a “cheese sales growth of nearly 30 million pounds.”

Relentless Marketing

Every day, the nation’s cows produce an average of about 60 million gallons of raw milk, yet less than a third goes toward making milk that people drink. And the majority of that milk has fat removed to make the low-fat or nonfat milk that Americans prefer. A vast amount of leftover whole milk and extracted milk fat results.

For years, the federal government bought the industry’s excess cheese and butter, an outgrowth of a Depression-era commitment to use price supports and other tools to maintain the dairy industry as a vital national resource. This stockpile, packed away in cool caves in Missouri, grew to a value of more than $4 billion by 1983, when Washington switched gears.

The government started buying only what it needed for food assistance programs. It also began paying farmers to slaughter some dairy cows. But at the time, the industry was moving toward larger, more sophisticated operations that increased productivity through artificial insemination, hormones and lighting that kept cows more active.

In 1995, the government created Dairy Management Inc., a nonprofit corporation that has defined its mission as increasing dairy consumption by “offering the products consumers want, where and when they want them.”

Dairy Management, through the “Got Milk?” campaign, has been successful at slowing the decline in milk consumption, particularly focusing on schoolchildren. It has also relentlessly marketed cheese and pushed back against the Agriculture Department’s suggestion that people eat only low-fat or fat-free varieties.

In a July letter to the department’s nutrition committee, Dairy Management wrote that efforts to make fat-free cheese have largely foundered because fat is what makes cheese appealing. “Consumer acceptance of low-fat and fat-free cheeses has been limited,” it said.

Agriculture Department data show that cheese is a major reason the average American diet contains too much saturated fat.

Research has found that the cardiovascular benefits in cutting saturated fat may depend on what replaces it. Refined starches and sugar might be just as bad or even worse, while switching to unsaturated fats has been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease.

The department’s nutrition committee issued a new standard this summer calling for saturated fat not to exceed 7 percent of total calories, about 15.6 grams in a 2,000-calorie-a-day diet. Yet the average intake has remained about 11 percent to 12 percent of total calories for at least 15 years.

The department issued nutritional hints in a brochure titled “Steps To A Healthier You!” It instructs pizza lovers: “Ask for whole wheat crust and half the cheese” — even as Dairy Management has worked with pizza chains like Domino’s to increase cheese.

Dairy Management runs the largest of 18 Agriculture Department programs that market beef, pork, potatoes and other commodities. Their budgets are largely paid by levies imposed on farmers, but Dairy Management, which reported expenditures of $136 million last year, also received $5.3 million that year from the Agriculture Department to promote dairy sales overseas.

By comparison, the department’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, which promotes healthy diets, has a total budget of $6.5 million.

Although by law the secretary of agriculture approves Dairy Management’s contracts and advertising campaigns, the organization has become a full-blown company with 162 employees skilled in product development and marketing. It also includes the National Dairy Council, a 95-year-old group that acts as its research and communications arm.

Dairy Management’s longtime chief executive, Thomas P. Gallagher, received $633,475 in compensation in 2008, with first-class travel privileges, according to federal tax filings. Annual compensation for two other officials top $300,000 each.

Mr. Gallagher, who declined to be interviewed for this article, was described by board members, employees and food industry officials as an astute executive and effective champion of the sprawling dairy industry.

“He’s a big thinker,” said David Brandon, former chief executive of Domino’s. “A very creative guy who thinks big and is willing to make bets in helping to drive the business on behalf of his dairy farmers.”

Disputed Research

“Great news for dieters,” Dairy Management said in an advertisement in People magazine in 2005. “Clinical studies show that people on a reduced-calorie diet who consume three servings of milk, cheese or yogurt each day can lose significantly more weight and more body fat than those who just cut calories.”

With milk consumption in decline, Dairy Management had hit on a fresh marketing strategy with its weight-loss campaign.

When the campaign began in 2003, a Dairy Management official said it was inspired by newly relaxed federal rules on health claims and the ensuing “rapid growth of ‘better for you’ products.”

It was based on research by Michael B. Zemel, a University of Tennessee nutritionist and author of “The Calcium Key: The Revolutionary Diet Discovery That Will Help You Lose Weight Faster.” Precisely how dairy facilitates weight loss is unclear, Dr. Zemel said in interviews and e-mails, but in part it involves counteracting a hormone that fosters fat deposits when the body is low on calcium.

Dairy Management licensed Dr. Zemel’s research, promoted his book and enlisted a team of scientific advisers who “identified further research to develop more aggressive claims in the future,” according to a campaign strategy presentation.

One such study was conducted by Jean Harvey-Berino, chairwoman of the Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences at the University of Vermont. “I think they felt they had a lot riding on it,” she said of the weight loss claim, “and felt it was a cash cow if it worked out.”

“I’m a big promoter of dairy,” she added, noting that her research was also paid for by Dairy Management.

But by 2004, her study had found no evidence of weight loss. She said Dairy Management took the news poorly, threatening to audit her work. She said she was astonished when the organization pressed on with its ad campaign.

“I thought they were crazy, and that eventually somebody would catch up with them,” she said.

Her study was published in 2005, and at scientific meetings she heard from other researchers who also failed to confirm Dr. Zemel’s work, including Dr. Jack A. Yanovski, an obesity unit chief at the National Institutes of Health.

But in late 2006, Dairy Management was still citing the weight-loss claim in urging the Agriculture Department not to cut the amount of cheese in federal food assistance programs. “The available data provide strong support for a beneficial effect of increased dairy foods on body weight and body composition,” two organization officials wrote, making no mention of Dr. Harvey-Berino’s findings.

Having dismissed the weight-loss claim in 2005, the federal nutrition advisory committee this summer again found the underlying science “not convincing.”

The campaign lasted until 2007, when the Federal Trade Commission acted on a two-year-old petition by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an advocacy group that challenged the campaign’s claims. “If you want to look at why people are fat today, it’s pretty hard to identify a contributor more significant than this meteoric rise in cheese consumption,” Dr. Neal D. Barnard, president of the physicians’ group, said in an interview.

The trade commission notified the group that Agriculture Department and dairy officials had decided to halt the campaign pending additional research. Dr. Zemel said he remained hopeful that his findings would eventually be upheld.

Meanwhile, Dairy Management, which allotted $12.4 million for nutrition research in 2008, has moved on to finance studies on promising opportunities, including the promotion of chocolate milk as a sports recovery drink and the use of cheese to entice children into eating healthy foods like string beans.

An All-Out Campaign

On Oct. 13, Domino’s announced the latest in its Legends line of cheesier pizza, which Dairy Management is promoting with the $12 million marketing effort.

Called the Wisconsin, the new pie has six cheeses on top and two more in the crust. “This is one way that we can support dairy farms across the country: by selling a pizza featuring an abundance of their products,” a Domino’s spokesman said in a news release. “We think that’s a good thing.”

laboratory test of the Wisconsin that was commissioned by The Times found that one-quarter of a medium thin-crust pie had 12 grams of saturated fat, more than three-quarters of the recommended daily maximum. It also has 430 calories, double the calories in pizza formulations that the chain bills as its “lighter options.”

According to contract records released through the Freedom of Information Act, Dairy Management’s role in helping to develop Domino’s pizzas included generating and testing new pizza concepts.

When Dairy Management began working with companies like Domino’s, it first had to convince them that cheese would make their products more desirable, records and interviews show. It provided banners and special lighting for the drive-up window menus at fast food restaurants, recalled Debra Olson Linday, who led Dairy Management’s early efforts in promoting cheese to restaurant chains before leaving in 1997.

By 1999, food retailers and manufacturers were coming to Dairy Management for help.

“Let’s sell more pizza and more cheese!” said two officials with Pizza Hut, which began putting cheese inside its crust after holding development meetings with Dairy Management, according to amemorandum released by the Agriculture Department.

Derek Correia, a former Pizza Hut product innovations chief, said Dairy Management also helped find suppliers for the extra cheese. “We were using four cheeses, if not six, and with a company like Pizza Hut, that is a lot of supply,” he said in an interview.

And unlike with its advertising campaigns, Dairy Management and the Agriculture Department could point to specific results with these projects. The “Summer of Cheese” promotion it developed with Pizza Hut in 2002 generated the use of 102 million additional pounds of cheese, the department reported to Congress.

“More cheese on pizza equals more cheese sales,” Mr. Gallagher, the Dairy Management chief executive, wrote in a guest column in a trade publication last year. “In fact, if every pizza included one more ounce of cheese, we would sell an additional 250 million pounds of cheese annually.”

Working with some of the largest food companies, Dairy Management has also pushed to expand the use of cheese in processed foods and home cooking. The Agriculture Department has reported a 5 percent to 16 percent increase in sales of cheese snacks in stores where Dairy Management has helped grocers reinvent their dairy aisles. Now on display is an array of sliced, grated and cubed products, along with handy recipes for home cooking that use more cheese.

The strategy is focusing on families whose cheese “habit” outpaces their concern about the health risks, Dairy Management documentsshow. One study gave them a name: “Cheese snacking fanatics.”



A version of this article appeared in print on November 7, 2010, on page A1 of the New York edition.

Marketing Milk and Disease

Marketing Milk and Disease by John McDougall, MD

The Dairy Industry is really big business, with sales of
over $11 billion for milk and $16 billion for cheese
annually in the USA alone, so you might expect hard line
marketing from them, but would you expect them to
aggressively sell their products if they were known to be
harmful to people, especially to women and children?

The Dairy Management Inc., whose purpose is to build demand
for dairy products on behalf of America’s 80,000-plus dairy
producers, has just released the Dairy Checkoff 2003 Unified
Marketing Plan (UMP) with a budget of $165.7 million. (1)

The United Marketing Plan explains, “This ongoing program
area (referring to the section Dairy Image/Confidence) aims
to protect and enhance consumer confidence in dairy products
and the dairy industry. A major component involves
conducting and communicating the results of dairy nutrition
research showing the healthfulness of dairy products, as
well as issues and crisis management.” (1)(Most likely, I
fall under the heading of “issues and crisis management.”)

A significant portion of the money from the 2003 Unified
Marketing Plan is specifically targeted to children ages 6
to 12 and their mothers. The goal is “to guide school-age
children to become life-long consumers of dairy products,
2003 activities will target students, parents, educators and
school foodservice professionals.” (1) (Similar words and
intentions have been attributed to the tobacco industry.)
All this marketing is working, too: annual fluid milk
consumption among kids 6 to 12 increased to 28 gallons per
capita, the highest level in 10 years. Children under 18
drink 46% of the milk consumed in the USA.

Realize that when I say milk in this article, I’m also
implicating all dairy products that are made from milk:
non-fat milk, low-fat milk, buttermilk, cheeses, cottage
cheese, yogurt, ice cream, whey, kefir, and butter. All
of them share a similar nutritional profile (plus or
minus the fat, protein, and sugar), and as a result, all
of them contribute to a wide range of health problems.

Will the UMP Inform You of the Contamination?
E. Coli, AIDS and Leukemia Viruses?

Last month I left you with some very disturbing facts
about the contamination of milk with loads of bacteria
and millions of white blood cells (pus cells) which are
there to help fight off the infections found in cows and
milk (see the April 2003 Newsletter found at

Will the 2003 Unified Marketing Plan specify money to
inform you of this upsetting information? You will never
see an advertisement with a famous movie star proudly
wearing a white mustache, properly labeled as containing
300,000 white blood cells and 25,000 bacteria.

Dairy products were the foods most often recalled by the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from the period
October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1998 because of
contamination with infectious agents, mostly bacteria. (2)

They are commonly tainted with disease-causing bacteria,
such as salmonella, staphylococci, listeria, deadly E. coli
O1573 and Mycobacterium paratuberculosis (4) (possibly one
of the agents causing Crohn’s disease; a form of
life-threatening chronic colitis), as well as viruses known
to cause lymphoma and leukemia-like diseases, and immune
deficiency in cattle.

AIDS and Leukemia Viruses

Dairy cattle are infected with bovine immunodeficiency
viruses (BIV) and bovine leukemia viruses (BLV), worldwide.
(Bovine immunodeficiency viruses can also be properly
referred to as bovine AIDS viruses.)

In the United States, results show an average 40% of beef
herds and 64% of dairy herds are infected with BIV. (5)

In Canada (6-7), the infection rate is 70% and in Argentina
(8) the rate is 84% for BLV.

Herds infected with the BIV are usually infected with the
leukemia virus (BLV) also. (5)

Both viruses can cross species lines thus infecting other
animals, like sheep, goats, and chimpanzees – and they
develop disease. (5)

Nationwide and worldwide, leukemia is more common in the
higher dairy consuming populations. (9,10)

An increased incidence of leukemia has been found among
dairy farmers in multiple studies. (11-14)

BIV infection has been reported in a person. (15)

The bovine leukemia virus has been classified in the same
group as the Human T-cell Leukemia/Lymphotropic virus
type 1 (HTLV-1), which is known to cause leukemia and
lymphomas in humans (Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma). (16)

BIV is structurally and genetically closely related to
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type-1 (the virus causing
human AIDS). (17)

Pasteurization kills many types of microorganisms, but it is
not foolproof. There is also concern that pasteurization may
break the viruses into fragments that may become even more
dangerous. (18)

Has it been shown that the bovine AIDS and/or leukemia viruses
will infect you and cause disease? No. Nor has it been proved
that they will not. Compared to the efforts to try to convince
you of the bone-building benefits of milk, almost nothing has
been spent to establish whether or not it is safe to feed your
family dairy products teeming with bovine immunodeficiency and
bovine leukemia viruses (and/or viral fragments). Some countries
take this matter very seriously. For example, in many European
countries, health officials have conducted programs to eradicate
infected herds; Finland’ program has successfully eradicated
BLV from its cattle. (19)

If you live in a region with a high incidence of herd infection
with these viruses you can be pretty sure you will be consuming
dairy products containing whole viruses or fragments of these
viruses, since the milk from many dairy farms is mixed in large
vats at the dairy factory before processing and packaging.
Since the industry will not act responsibly in many countries,
consumers are left with one choice: eliminate all dairy
products from their diet. If eliminating dairy products would
prevent even a small risk of human disease, it would be well
worthwhile, especially since, as you learned in the April 2003
McDougall Newsletter, they are completely unnecessary for
excellent health.

Will the UMP Market the Pain and Suffering Caused Children?

The Dairy Management Inc. has specifically targeted children
in their campaign. (1) This will raise no public concern,
because most people consider cow’s milk the healthiest of all
food choices, especially when it comes to children. Over 25%
of children are overweight in Western countries and cow’s milk,
cheese, yogurt, ice cream, butter, and sour cream, with all
their fat and calories, contribute greatly to this deadly
epidemic. Many of these overweight children are now developing
type-2 diabetes. However, the most common variety of diabetes
found in children is still type-1 or insulin dependent
diabetes (IDDM).

Type-1 Diabetes

The evidence incriminating cow’s milk consumption in the cause
of type-1 diabetes is sufficient to cause the American Academy
of Pediatrics to issue these warnings, “Early exposure of
infants to cow’s milk protein may be an important factor in the
initiation of the beta cell (insulin-producing cells of the
pancreas) destructive process in some individuals.” (20) “The
avoidance of cow’s milk protein for the first several months
of life may reduce the later development of IDDM or delay its
onset in susceptible people.” (20)

Exposure to cow’s milk protein early in life, when the
intestinal tract is immature, sometimes results in the milk
protein entering the blood stream where antibodies to this
foreign substance, cow’s milk, are made by the immune system.
Unfortunately, these same antibodies also attack the insulin-
producing cells of the pancreas. By glassful of milk after
spoonful of ice cream, over a period of about 5 to 7 years,
the child destroys his or her own pancreas – and is left
with a lifelong, life-threatening, handicap: diabetes. The
pancreas is forever destroyed and the child will have to take
insulin shots daily. Complications, such as blindness, kidney
failure, and heart disease will be a real threat during his
or her shortened lifespan.(See my July 2002 McDougall
Newsletter for a discussion of type-1 diabetes).


Not as life-threatening as diabetes, but for some as mentally
and physically distressing, is chronic constipation. As a doctor
who has cared for hundreds of children, I can tell you they suffer
with pain, bleeding, hemorrhoids, and embarrassment. The causal
effects of cow’s milk were clearly demonstrated in a study of 65
severely constipated children published in the New England Journal
of Medicine. (21)

These boys and girls complained of only one bowel movement every
3 to 15 days and many didn’t even respond to strong laxatives
(lactulose and mineral oil). Forty-four of the 65 (68%) found
relief of their constipation when taken off the cow’s milk.
Evidence of inflammation of the bowel was found on biopsy, and
anal fissures and pain were commonly associated with the
constipation “elimination of the cow’s milk solved these problems.”

When cow’s milk was reintroduced into their diet 8 to 12 months
later, all of the children developed constipation within 5 to 10
days. For constipation alone, cow’s milk should be banned from
the School Milk Programs, worldwide.

Rhinitis and Otitis Media

The multitude of snotty-nosed kids frequently visiting the
pediatrician’s office for ear infections is much more obvious
than the constipated crowd, and these problems less devastating
than type-1 diabetes, but these complaints also can be due to
consuming the foreign proteins intended for calves. (22-25)
In addition, these same children are likely to suffer from
gastroesophageal reflux, asthma and/or eczema from their
unnatural habit of drinking cow’s milk.

Diseases of Foreign Protein

Many conditions can be traced back to reactions to cow’s milk.
Milk contains more than 25 different proteins that can induce
adverse reactions in humans. (26) Our immune system perceives
these foreign proteins as alien invaders, like a virus or
bacteria, and launches an attack in response, as in the case
of type-1 diabetes discussed above and many other allergic
and autoimmune diseases.


General: Loss of appetite, growth retardation.

Upper Gastrointestinal:

Canker sores (aphthous stomatitis), irritation of tongue, lips and
mouth, tonsil enlargement, vomiting, gastroesophageal reflux (GERD),
Sandifer’s syndrome, peptic ulcer disease, colic, stomach cramps,
abdominal distention, intestinal obstruction, type-1 diabetes.

Lower Gastrointestinal:

Bloody stools, colitis, malabsorption, diarrhea, painful defecation,
fecal soiling, infantile colic, chronic constipation, infantile food
protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES), Crohn’s disease,
ulcerative colitis.


Nasal stuffiness, runny nose, otitis media (inner ear trouble),
sinusitis, wheezing, asthma, and pulmonary infiltrates.

Bone and joint:

Rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, lupus,
Beheta’s disease, (possibly psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing


Rashes, atopic dermatitis, eczema, seborrhea, hives (urticaria)

Nervous System (Behavioral):

Multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, autism, schizophrenia,
irritability, restlessness, hyperactivity, headache, lethargy,
fatigue, “allergic-tension fatigue syndrome,” muscle pain,
mental depression, enuresis (bed-wetting).

Abnormal blood clotting, iron deficiency anemia, low serum
proteins, thrombocytopenia, and eosinophilia.


Nephrotic syndrome, glomerulonephritis, anaphylactic shock and
death, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS or crib or cot death),
injury to the arteries causing arteritis, and eventually,

References are available through the National Library of
Medicine, – Search cow’s milk and
any of the diseases listed above.

All dairy products contain milk proteins, including skim milk,
yogurt, cheese, and butter, and many butter substitutes. Milk
proteins are listed in packaged food products with a variety of
names, such as milk solids, skim milk powder, casein, caseinates,
whey, and albumin. Milk is also often put into packaged foods and
not declared on the label – this is illegal and punishable by FDA

Even with all of this disease in children the American School Food
Service Association and the dairy industry have developed a School
Milk Pilot Test to demonstrate that kids will drink more milk in
school if certain product enhancements are made. (27)

The result was milk sales increased by an average of 18 percent
and consumption increased by 35 percent when schools provided
flavored milks and other package enhancements. (28)

The UMP Will Try to Deceive You about the Fattening Nature of
Dairy Foods.

“Independent research confirming dairy’s role in weight reduction
is mounting,” said Dr. Greg Miller, senior vice president of nutrition
and scientific affairs for the Dairy Checkoff. (29) “This helps to
position dairy foods as part of the solution to America’s growing
obesity epidemic.” And Miller added, “Informing the public about
dairy’s role in the fight against obesity will help increase
consumption of milk, cheese and yogurt, among other dairy products.”

Shouldn’t the idea of milk acting as an “antiobesity” food
strike you as fundamentally contradictory? After all, the
biologic purpose of cow’s milk is to provide large amounts
of energy and nutrients to grow the young animal from 60 to
600 pounds. So how does milk become a weight loss product in
the 21st century? This idea began with the observation that
underprivileged people, who have poor diets in general, are
often obese, and also consume few dairy products. (30) Some
experiments that followed showed people and animals on calorie-
restricted diets lost a small amount of extra weight when
calcium or dairy foods were part of their diet.

The “antiobesity” effects of dairy are difficult to explain, but
may be due to calcium binding fat in the intestine, preventing its
absorption. (30)

A thorough search of the literature for properly designed studies
shows only one of 17 randomized studies found weight loss in people
taking calcium pills, and of the nine randomized studies where
fluid milk was added, two showed significant weight gain, and none
showed significant loss. (31)

In one study funded by a grant from the International Dairy Foods
Association, 204 healthy men and women were asked to increase
their intake of skim or 1% milk by three cups a day for 12 weeks;
those consuming the extra milk gained an average of 1.32 pounds
(0.6 Kg). (32) Can you imagine what their weight gain would have
been if they had been asked to add whole milk, cheese, butter,
and ice cream to their diet, instead of skim and low-fat 1% milk?

The result of all this research was well summed up by one of the
dairy industry’s frequent spokespersons at the Dairy Management
Inc. sponsored Symposium: Dairy Product Components and Weight
Regulation, held April 21, 2002 in New Orleans, with this statement,
“In conclusion, the data available from randomized trials of dairy
product or calcium supplementation provide little support for an
effect in reducing body weight or fat mass.” (31)

Yet the consumer will hear from Dr. Miller and the rest of the
industry, eat more dairy products and you will lose weight.

Dairy products are loaded with fats that are easily stored under
your skin as “body fat.” The fats in the cold glass of milk, the
little bite of cheese, and that small bowl of ice cream will move
from your lips to your hips effortlessly. In fact, it moves with
so little effort that the chemical structure of the fat isn’t even
changed. Cow’s milk contains a unique kind of fat with double
bonds located at the C-15 and C-17 position on the fat’s carbon
chain. Examination of a person’s fatty (adipose) tissues following
a biopsy will show the amount of this kind of fat present, which
will be in direct proportion to the amount of dairy products
the person consumes. (33)

All that fat the dairy industry asks us to eat is associated with
higher risks of heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and breast,
prostate, uterine and colon cancer. Yet, as a marketing scheme,
the dairy industry has teamed up with the National Medical
Association to write articles about “the role of dairy in helping
reduce the risk of heart disease, hypertension, and other serious
health issues.” (34)

The National Medical Association promotes the collective interests
of physicians and patients of African descent. Please explain to me
how this association came about when the vast majority of people of
African descent (80% to 90%) cannot drink milk because of lactose
intolerance; causing them diarrhea, stomach cramps and gas. (35)

Not only is this dairy fat unattractively worn and a health
hazard, but it is also a source of large quantities of
environmental chemicals, like dioxins and DDT, that affect your
health and the health of a mother’s offspring during pregnancy
and nursing. (36) One reason a young girl needs to start thinking
about a healthier diet early is because the accumulation of these
chemicals in her own body fat occurs over her entire lifetime.

The UMP Will Try to Confuse You about Bone Health and Animal Protein

Osteoporosis is caused by several factors; however, the most
important one is diet; especially the amount of animal protein
and acid in the foods we eat. (37-39 0 The high acid foods are
meat, poultry, fish, seafood, and hard cheeses, parmesan cheese
is the most acidic of all foods commonly consumed.” (40)

Once consumed, this food-derived acid must be neutralized in the
body. Fruits and vegetables can do this neutralizing (these foods
are alkaline in nature). However, because the diet of the average
Westerner is so deficient in fruits and vegetables and so high in
acid foods, the primary neutralizer of dietary acid becomes their
bones. The bones dissolve to release alkaline materials.

Worldwide, the highest rates of hip fractures are among populations
that consume the most animal food (including dairy products) like
people from the USA, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand,
etc. (41,42) The lowest rates are among people who eat little or no
dairy foods (these people are on lower calcium diets) like people
from rural Asia and rural Africa. (41,42)

The basic experiments published in the 1980s clearly show protein
causes bone loss, and calcium offers little or no protection. (43)
Even the foremost scientists hired by the dairy industry know protein
is harmful to the bones. (44) In my April 2003 Newsletter I explained
there was only one properly designed study testing the effects of
fluid milk on the bone health of postmenopausal women, and the results
were: those who received the extra milk for a year lost more bone than
those who didn’t drink the milk. (44) The authors, funded by the
National Dairy Council, explained in their paper, “The protein content
of the milk supplement may have a negative effect on calcium balance,
possibly through an increase in kidney losses of calcium or through a
direct effect on bone resorption.” Trying to explain why those
receiving the milk were in worse calcium balance, they said, “this
may have been due to the average 30 percent increase in protein
intake during milk supplementation.”

Unfortunately, all this damning information does not sit well with
the powerful dairy industry, so they have started the “3-A-Day of
Dairy” program to battle the calcium crisis in America by promoting
milk, cheese and yogurt for “stronger bones” and they have been busy
doing their own research to prove protein is good for the bones.

Regrettably for them, their designing means were just revealed
in the May 2003 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
(49) The article in this journal exposed the way they made the
results show protein is good for the bones. To devise research
that appears to contradict hundreds of articles published over
the past 35 years, you only have to provide sufficient alkaline
material in the diet of the people being studied to neutralize
the acid from the animal foods. This was accomplished by
studying populations that have diets high in neutralizing fruits
and vegetables; the other approach employed was to add a strong
alkali source to the experiment, such as an antacid pill (wafer),
calcium citrate (like Citracal).

Once the acid from the food is neutralized, then any bone building
factors that might be present in meat and dairy can exert their
effects. High protein foods, and especially dairy foods, raise the
levels of a powerful growth-stimulating hormone in the body, called
insulin-like growth factor-1 or IGF-1. Stimulation of bone growth
by this hormone is now being offered as the reason dairy products
build strong bones. It has long been necessary for them to find a
more scientifically supportable explanation, because the bulk of
the research shows the calcium in dairy foods has little or no
benefit for bone health. (50-52)

The UMP Will Not Promote the Fact that IGF-1 is a Powerful
Cancer Promoter

Consumption of animal products increases the levels of
insulin-like growth factor-1 in your body. However, modern
dairy technology has made dairy products an even more potent
source of this growth stimulant. Since 1985, U.S. dairy
farmers have been allowed to inject cows with recombinant bovine
growth hormone (rbGH), a genetically engineered bovine growth
hormone that increases milk production. RbGH treatment produces
an increase in IGF-1 in cow’s milk, by as much as 10-fold. (53,54)
IGF-1 is not destroyed by pasteurization. (53) The overall effect
is that milk seems to raise IGF-1 levels in people more than any
other component of our diet. (55)

The direct evidence of the effects of cow’s milk on IGF-1 levels
in people has been provided by the dairy industry’s own efforts.
Two recent studies, one on adolescent girls and the other on
post-menopausal women, showed increasing milk consumption actually raises
plasma levels of IGF-1 in the person’s body by an average of 10%.

Their take on this is, “this is a beneficial effecT” because IGF-1
stimulates bone growth. But, the actual lasting consequences should
deliver the final deathblow to dairy products: IGF-1 promotes the
growth of cancer. This growth promoter has been strongly linked to
the development of cancer of the breast, prostate, lung, and colon.
(58) Excess IGF-1 stimulates cell proliferation and inhibits cell
death – two activities you definitely don’t want when cancer cells
are involved. (58)

There is more to cancer promotion by dairy foods than IGF-1. Most
dairy products are high in saturated fat – and fat is the number
one suspect when it comes to the cause of most common cancers in
Western societies (for example, breast, prostate, colon, kidney,
pancreas). Recent studies have linked the sugar (lactose) and fat
in milk with ovarian cancer, (59,60) and the calcium in milk
lowers concentrations of a specific form of vitamin D that protects
against prostate cancer, raising men’s overall risk. (61,62)
(See my February 2003 Newsletter for more information on diet and
prostate cancer.) Hormones (estrogens) are also involved in cancers
of reproductive organs, like breast and uterine cancer. There are
several reasons dairy products raise a woman’s hormone levels
causing a variety of hormone-dependent problems from early onset
of menstruation (menarche) to PMS and uterine fibroids – but one
is unique to cow’s milk. Cows are milked even while they are
pregnant. As a result of the pregnancy, cows secrete high levels
of estrogen into their milk. (63)

Will the UMP Advertise that Dairy Is Simply Liquid Meat?

Red meat has become a “dirty word” when it comes to health.
At the opposite end of the spectrum of opinions on food is
cow’s milk – one of the world’S most trusted foods. Do you
remember the “Basic Four Food Groups?” Dairy was usually placed
first in this chart which was hung in every schoolroom (and by
no coincidence the dairy industry also provided the chart).

Dairy products are deficient in iron and beef is deficient in
calcium; both contain too little dietary fiber, essential fat
(linoleic acid), and vitamin C and B3 (niacin) to meet human
nutritional requirements. (64) Heavy consumption of either of
these food groups – loaded with fat and cholesterol – will result
in the diseases common to affluent societies, such as obesity,
heart disease, strokes, type-2 diabetes and cancer, to name
just a few serious problems. (65)

If a patient bargained with me, “I’ll give up only one of the
first two food groups “meat or milk” – hopes of getting well,”
my recommendation for almost all common health problems in
Western society would be, “You’re likely to get the most benefits
if you give up the dairy products.”

1) Dairy Management Inc.

2) Wong S. Recalls of foods and cosmetics due to microbial
contamination reported to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. J Food Prot 2000 Aug;63(8):1113-6

3) Chapman PA. Sources of Escherichia coli O157 and
experiences over the past 15 years in Sheffield, UK. Symp
Ser Soc Appl Microbiol. 2000;(29):51S-60S.

4) Lund BM. Pasteurization of milk and the heat resistance
of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis: a critical
review of the data. Int J Food Microbiol. 2002 Jul 25;77(1-

5) Gonda M. Bovine immunodeficiency virus. AIDS. 1992

6) Sargeant JM. Associations between farm management
practices, productivity, and bovine leukemia virus infection
in Ontario dairy herds. Prev Vet Med. 1997 Aug;31(3-4):211-

7) VanLeeuwen JA,. Seroprevalence of infection with
Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis, bovine
leukemia virus, and bovine viral diarrhea virus in maritime
Canada dairy cattle. Can Vet J. 2001 Mar;42(3):193-8.

8) Trono KG. Seroprevalence of bovine leukemia virus in
dairy cattle in Argentina: comparison of sensitivity and
specificity of different detection methods. Vet Microbiol.
2001 Nov 26;83(3):235-48.

9) Hursting SD. Diet and human leukemia: an analysis of
international data. Prev Med. 1993 May;22(3):409-22.

10) Howell MA. Factor analysis of international cancer
mortality data and per capita food consumption. Br J
Cancer. 1974 Apr;29(4):328-36.

11) Kristensen P. Incidence and risk factors of cancer
among men and women in Norwegian agriculture. Scand J Work
Environ Health. 1996 Feb;22(1):14-26.

12) Reif J. Cancer risks in New Zealand farmers. Int J
Epidemiol. 1989 Dec;18(4):768-74.

13) Blair A. Leukemia cell types and agricultural
practices in Nebraska. Arch Environ Health. 1985 Jul-

14) Donham KJ. Epidemiologic relationships of the bovine
population and human leukemia in Iowa. Am J Epidemiol. 1980

15)Jacobs RM. Detection of multiple retroviral infections
in cattle and cross-reactivity of bovine immunodeficiency-
like virus and human immunodeficiency virus type 1 proteins
using bovine and human sera in a western blot assay. Can J
Vet Res. 1992 Oct;56(4):353-9.

16) Johnson J. Molecular biology and pathogenesis of the
human T-cell leukaemia/lymphotropic virus Type-1 (HTLV-1).
Int J Exp Pathol. 2001 Jun;82(3):135-47.

17) Whetstone CA. Examination of whether persistently
indeterminate human immunodeficiency virus type 1 Western
immunoblot reactions are due to serological reactivity with
bovine immunodeficiency-like virus. J Clin Microbiol. 1992

18) Ferrer JF. Milk of dairy cows frequently contains a
leukemogenic virus. Science. 1981 Aug 28;213(4511):1014-6.

19) Nuotio L. Eradication of enzootic bovine leukosis from
Finland. Prev Vet Med. 2003 May 30;59(1-2):43-9.

20) Work Group on Cow’s Milk Protein and Diabetes
Mellitus. Infant feeding practices and their possible
relationship to the etiology of diabetes mellitus.
Pediatrics 94:752, 1994.

21) Iacono G. Intolerance of cow’s milk and chronic
constipation in children. N Engl J Med. 1998 Oct

22) Yimyaem P. Gastrointestinal manifestations of cow’s
milk protein allergy during the first year of life. J Med
Assoc Thai. 2003 Feb;86(2):116-23.

23) Juntti H. Cow’s milk allergy is associated with
recurrent otitis media during childhood. Acta Otolaryngol.

24) Tikkanen S. Status of children with cow’s milk allergy
in infancy by 10 years of age. Acta Paediatr. 2000

25) Oranje AP. Natural course of cow’s milk allergy in
childhood atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome. Ann Allergy
Asthma Immunol. 2002 Dec;89(6 Suppl 1):52-5.

26) Bahna S. Allergies to Milk. Grune and Stratton, New

27) School Milk Pilot Test:

28) Results of School Milk Pilot Test:

29) Greg Miller’s Comments on Obesity:

30) Parikh SJ. Calcium intake and adiposity. Am J Clin
Nutr. 2003 Feb;77(2):281-7.

31) Barr SI. Increased dairy product or calcium intake: is
body weight or composition affected in humans? J Nutr. 2003

32) Barr SI. Effects of increased consumption of fluid
milk on energy and nutrient intake, body weight, and
cardiovascular risk factors in healthy older adults. J Am
Diet Assoc. 2000 Jul;100(7):810-7.

33) Baylin A. Adipose tissue biomarkers of fatty acid
intake. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Oct;76(4):750-7.

34) National Medical Association:

35) Bertron P. Racial bias in federal nutrition policy,
Part I: The public health implications of variations in
lactase persistence. J Natl Med Assoc. 1999 Mar;91(3):151-

36) Schecter A. Dioxins in U.S. food and estimated daily
intake. Chemosphere. 1994 Nov-Dec;29(9-11):2261-5.

37) Maurer M. Neutralization of Western diet inhibits bone
resorption independently of K intake and reduces cortisol
secretion in humans. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2003

38) Remer T. Influence of diet on acid-base balance.
Semin Dial. 2000 Jul-Aug;13(4):221-6.

39) Frassetto L. Diet, evolution and aging–the
pathophysiologic effects of the post-agricultural inversion
of the potassium-to-sodium and base-to-chloride ratios in
the human diet. Eur J Nutr. 2001 Oct;40(5):200-13.

40) Remer T. Potential renal acid load of foods and its
influence on urine pH. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995 Jul;95(7):791-

41) Abelow B. Cross-cultural association between dietary
animal protein and hip fracture: a hypothesis. Calcific
Tissue Int 50:14-8, 1992.

42) Frassetto LA . Worldwide incidence of hip fracture in
elderly women: relation to consumption of animal and
vegetable foods. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2000

43) McDougall J. The Great Debate. High vs. low protein.

44) Recker RR. The effect of milk supplements on calcium
metabolism, bone metabolism and calcium balance. Am J Clin
Nutr. 1985 Feb;41(2):254-63.

45) Munger RG. Prospective study of dietary protein intake
and risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal women. Am J Clin
Nutr. 1999 Jan;69(1):147-52.

46) Massey LK. Dietary animal and plant protein and human
bone health: a whole foods approach. J Nutr. 2003

47) Teegarden D. Dietary calcium, protein, and phosphorus
are related to bone mineral density and content in young
women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1998 Sep;68(3):749-54.

48) Kerstetter JE. Low protein intake: the impact on
calcium and bone homeostasis in humans. J Nutr. 2003

49) New SA. Calcium, protein, and fruit and vegetables as
dietary determinants of bone health. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003

50) Kanis JA. The use of calcium in the management of
osteoporosis. Bone. 1999 Apr;24(4):279-90.

51) Weinsier R. Dairy foods and bone health: examination
of the evidence. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Sep;72(3):681-9.

52) Hegsted DM. Fractures, calcium, and the modern diet.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Nov;74(5):571-3.

53) Mepham TB. Safety of milk from cows treated with
bovine somatotropin. Lancet. 1994 Jul 16;344(8916):197-8.

54) Juskevich JC. Bovine growth hormone: human food safety
evaluation. Science. 1990 Aug 24;249(4971):875-84.

55) Holmes MD. Dietary correlates of plasma insulin-like
growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding
protein 3 concentrations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev.
2002 Sep;11(9):852-61.

56) Cadogan J. Milk intake and bone mineral acquisition in
adolescent girls: randomised, controlled intervention trial.
BMJ 1997;315:1255-1260.

57) Heaney R. Dietary changes favorably affect bone
remodeling in older adults. J Am Diet Assoc 99:1228-33,

58) Yu H. Role of the insulin-like growth factor family in
cancer development and progression. J Natl Cancer Inst.
2000 Sep 20;92(18):1472-89.

59) Cramer DW, Harlow BL, Willet WC. Galactose consumption
and metabolism in relation to the risk of ovarian cancer.
Lancet 1989;2:66-71.

60) Mettlin CJ, Piver MS: A case-control study of milk-
drinking and ovarian cancer risk. American Journal of
Epidemiology 132(5): 871-876, 1990.

61) Giovannucci E. Calcium and fructose intake in relation
to risk of prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 1998 Feb

62) Chan J. Dairy products, calcium, and prostate cancer
risk in the Physicians’ Health Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001

63) Janowski T. Mammary secretion of oestrogens in the
cow. Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2002 Jul;23(1-2):125-37.

64) J Pennington. Bowes & Church’s Food Values of
Portions Commonly Used. 17th Ed. Lippincott. Philadelphia-
New York. 1998.

65) Weisburger J. Eat to live, not live to eat. Nutrition
2000; 16:767-73.