Organic Milk
 

I've recently been convinced by some friends to start buying organic milk... which is all well and good until you look at the price! The org. milk here is nearly double the price of our standard milk, and while it tastes good, I'm just not sure it's worth double the price.

Anyone seen any compelling research for organic milk vs regular (hormone fed) milk?

My dad read a book written by a doctor that preached the benefits of organic milk. I forgot the name of it; I'll ask him and post the name here. I don't drink milk because I don't think it's good for you. I know it has calcium and vitamin D in it, but I think the risks of the hormones and such outweigh the benefits. I'll call my dad as soon as he gets home from work and post the book's name.

Here's the skinny on organic. I'll draw an analogy. Think of cooking out on the grill. Using organic meats is like waving the bugs away while non-organic is like spraying the meat with Raid. Get the picture? Not to mention all the antibiotics and other crap they feed, inject or spray the cows with. Now, apply the same science to milk, veggies, fruits, etc.

Hope this explains things....!

but the main thing I thought organic milk did versus standard milk was avoid the growth hormones... I don't think it's primarily focused on pestacides, etc.

What I think is interesting is that other countries have already moved to all organic farming for milk, but the US hasn't... just curious why.

IMO, the only advantage to organic milk is it makes you feel good if you've already bought into the whole "organic is the only way to go" belief.

There's a lot of pseudo-science out there, but I've not seen any hard studies indicating that there's any health benefit to org. milk.

Organic Milk
 

After reading several studies (which I no longer have access to) and checking the information on the web, my wife and I decided to forgo animal milk all together, and switch to Soy or Almond milk for our kids and ourselves. In a nutshell, the data showed an increasing level of contaminants ie: antibiotics/hormones/chemicals ,In the end product, due to the way large producers create the milk products. As I remember there was no concrete evidence of health risk in milk, mostly because little data was made available, but the general trend was worrisome and promted us to take no chances with our babies. I will attempt to find the Data....and post it here.

Thanks Tecoyah... I'd really appreciate seeing that info. The fact that my wife is pregnant with our first is what really got us thinking about this issue - so I can completely relate to your comments about taking chances with your babies.

We switched to organic milk when my wife was pregnant. The growth hormone factor was what did it for us.

Take a look at the expiration dates on organic milk and compare them to regular milk.

My wife and I have mostly switched to soy milk over cow's milk. We still eat cheese made from cow's or goat's milk because it is just too good to give up. It always struck me as odd that adult humans would drink the milk of another species intended for its offspring. I don't really buy too much into the organic milk (or produce) theories. There is too much pseudo-science floating around out there.

This is an updated version of one of the articles we read.....mind you we did this a good five years ago.


Seven years ago, Feb. 4, 1994, despite nationwide protests by consumer groups, Monsanto and the FDA forced onto the US market the world's first GE animal drug, recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH, sometimes known as rBST).

BGH is a powerful GE drug produced by Monsanto which, injected into dairy cows, forces them to produce 15%-25% more milk, in the process seriously damaging their health and reproductive capacity.

Despite warnings from scientists, such as Dr. Michael Hansen from the Consumers Union and Dr. Samuel Epstein from the Cancer Prevention Coalition, that milk from rBGH injected cows contains substantially higher amounts of a potent cancer tumor promoter called IGF-1, and despite evidence that rBGH milk contains higher levels of pus, bacteria, and antibiotics, the FDA gave the hormone its seal of approval, with no real pre-market safety testing required.

Moreover, the FDA ruled, in a decision marred by rampant conflict of interest (several key FDA decision makers, including Michael Taylor, previously worked for Monsanto), that rBGH-derived products did not have to be labeled, despite polls showing that 90% of American consumers wanted labeling -- mainly so they could avoid buying rBGH-tainted products.

All of the major criticisms leveled against rBGH have turned out to be true. Since 1994, every industrialized country in the world, except for the US, has banned the drug.

In 1998, Canadian government scientists revealed that Monsanto's own data on feeding rBGH to rats, carefully concealed by the company and the FDA, indicated possible cancer dangers to humans.

Since rBGH was approved, approximately 40,000 small and medium-sized US dairy farmers, 1/3 of the total in the country, have gone out of business, concentrating milk production in the hands of industrial-sized dairies, most of whom are injecting their cows with this cruel and dangerous drug.

In a 1998 survey by Family Farm Defenders, it was found that mortality rates for cows on factory dairy farms in Wisconsin, those injecting their herds with rBGH, were running at 40% per year. In other words, after two and a half years of rBGH injections most of these drugged and supercharged cows were dead.

Typically, dairy cows live for 15-20 years.

Alarmed and revolted by rBGH, consumers have turned in droves to organic milk and dairy products or to brands labeled as rBGH-free. Nonetheless, use of the drug has continued to increase in the US (and in nations like Brazil and Mexico) especially in large dairy herds, so that currently 15% of America's 10 million lactating dairy cows are being injected with rBGH.

Compounding the problem of rBGH contamination, most of the nation's 1500 dairy companies are allowing the co-mingling of rBGH and non-rBGH milk, thereby contaminating 80-90% of the nation's milk and dairy supply (including all of the major infant formula brands). For a list of organic and rBGH-free dairies in the US consult the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) website.

The major reason that rBGH is still on the market is that it is not labeled. Supermarket dairy managers, following guidelines circulated by the rBGH and biotech lobby, routinely lie to consumers, telling them either that rBGH is not in their products, or that there's no way to tell, and reassuring them that the FDA has certified that rBGH is safe.

Of course, every survey conducted since 1994 shows that if consumers were given a choice, they would boycott rBGH-tainted products.

Responding to the global controversy surrounding the drug, Monsanto put BGH for sale in 1998, but there were no takers. Transnational PR firms working with the biotech industry have categorized Monsanto's handling of the rBGH controversy as a "public relations disaster."

Starbucks has been a target as 3/4 of the 32 million gallons of milk it buys every year in the US are coming from dairies that allow cows to be injected with rBGH.

Once Starbucks' 15 million customers learn that most of the latte or cappuccino drinks they're paying top dollar for (3/4 of the volume of these drinks are milk) contain an extra dose of pus, antibiotics, and growth hormones and that Fair Trade and organic coffee constitute less than one percent of company sales, they may decide to take their business elsewhere.

Total annual sales for the company are approximately $2.5 billion.

The worst nightmare of Monsanto and the biotech industry is starting to materialize: a mass-based consumer and environmental marketplace pressure campaign in the heartland of GE foods-North America.

A number of major US food companies are already responding to public pressure and starting to sweep GE foods off their products lists and their grocery shelves: Gerber (baby food), Heinz (baby food), Frito-Lay (at least for their corn), Whole Foods, Wild Oats, Trader Joe's, and even McDonald's (at least for their French fries).


There is simply too much Data available, in my opinion, to ignore....propoganda or not.

wow- pretty compelling information. Can you give me the source of this article? I'm always a little intereted in seeing who is publishing the info...gives me some context.

Okay, so how does Soy milk taste compared to regular 1% or Skim milk?

depends on the flavor they put in it... but I think there is already another thread on soymilk, etc...

I like soy milk... but I don't think that it *tastes* like cows milk. The vanilla flavor is my favorite soy milk.

I really can't stand the taste of Soy Milk but when we can afford to we buy organic milk.

The daughter of a family friend started to go into puberty at age 7.5 (i.e. growing dark pubic hair, armpit hair, bone growth, everything). After speaking to doctors and doing some research it was decided that the most likely reason was the hormones in the milk... she drank a lot of milk. In doing their research they discovered that early puberty is a growing trend in young children.

yeah - it's stories like that Charlatan that scare the crap out of me... I think these hormones have got to have some effect.

That's the thing that freaks me out. Kids are getting older at a younger age, if that makes any sense. And the only logical reason I can think of is the milk and meat that kids eat. Pumped full of hormones. Pretty scary stuff.

Very interesting. It seems that everyone is making assumptions more than showing any real concrete evidence that milk and meat with hormones are bad. Most people who work out want hormones for bigger muscles, etc. Unless you kill what you eat, it is impossible to know what happens to the food you eat before it reaches your dinner table. In the U.S. we have it much better than other parts of the world where they have to worry about parasites and other things in food. In fact, there are many places that you have to get shots for prior to going there because of the food dangers. I am not in any way saying that what the U.S. does with food processing is the best, but I think that we are "safer" eating what comes from the local grocer than we think.

I don't think anyone is making asumptions here... There is study after study that indicates that BGH and the antibiotics that are given to cows is a serious problem. So much so that much of Europe has banned the practice.

However, like the tobacco companies, agribusiness has a vested interest in saying just the opposite. They come up with studies showing that there is no problem with what we are doing to our cattle and that it does not transfer to the food supply.

If I have certified organic food, I can be 100% assured that it organic (i.e. no pesticides, hormones, genetic modification, etc.).

Yes, there are issues in other countries but that largely stems from refrigeration and storage.

Ack, sorry about the lack of response, discotequi...but tecoyah posted some good stuff that is basically what is contained in the book I mentioned. My dad read this book after my stepmother was diagnosed with breast cancer, which does not run in her family. The doctor suggested no more dairy products, and my dad wanted to know why. As the article tecoyah posted explained, the bovine growth hormone has been linked (don't flame, I'm just saying linked) to breast, prostate, and colon cancer. Definitely scary stuff.

As for whoever asked about the taste of soymilk, it has its own flavor which is nothing like regular milk. I love chocolate soymilk, I think it's delicious. The only time I drink milk (which I buy organic) is in my cereal; I just don't like the soymilk taste in my cereal. There are also rice, almond, and oat varieties of milks available too.

just to play devil's advocate, how does one know that the soy grown to make the soy milk with is not treated with pesticides?!?!? if it's not labeled organic soy milk, can you really be sure that it's all that much safer than non-organic cow's milk.

an interesting note is that humans are the only organisms/animals/primates to drink milk past infancy... but that's not really the point of this topic.

i suppose that there maybe some truth to the cows filled with hormones... but then it assumes that these hormones make it into the milk produced in the cows... i don't know cow anatomy, but assuming it's similar in physiologic properties to humans, there is a blood-milk barrier, meaning that not everything that is in the blood ends up in the milk. said another way, there is a "filter" between the milk and the blood. that's not to say that it's impossible for growth hormones or antibiotics to end up in the milk.

the article cited above uses the word pus, rather than the term white blood cells (which is all that pus is)... i'm not sure if this is to scare the reader, or the writer's lack of knowledge, or just trying to use a word that the reader doesn't understand. what confuses me about the point is that if there is an increase in the amount of antibiotics used in these cows (which would fight off infection, thus decreasing the amount of white blood cells needed), why is there an increase in the amount of white blood cells? unless of course, that it's simply not true.

with all of that said, i don't think organic milk is bad at all. is non-organic milk bad for you... probably not. is soy milk the safe alternative? it's safe, but whether or not it's organic is another question.