Discussion Board

I was just watching Dr. McDougall's presentation dairy products:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5215695644951404318#docid=-2348910096409126100

You know that there's something fishy about the argument that women need to drink milk and eat cheese and yogurt in order to ward off osteoporosis when most of the world is lactose intolerant. Lactose intolerance is actually normal. Tolerance of lactose is the aberration.

I'm lactose intolerant.

Sure...I could seek out lactose-free dairy products. However, if my body needed something that desperately..wouldn't you think it would be easily available for me? Would I have to wait until a technique was developed in order to strip dairy of lactose?

I guess I should be thankful for my lactose intolerance. After all, it has kept me away from dairy.

Alpha, here's a copy of a letter I sent to a newsletter I used to get. Despite my request for a response, I never received one.




May 24, 2009

The Editor
Arthritis Advisor
P.O. Box 5656
Norwalk, CT 06856-5656

Re: June Issue Arthritis Advisor
Bruce Long, M.D. on Calcium

Dear Editor:

I read with interest the piece in the June issue on Calcium with input by Bruce Long, M.D. I’ve recently been trying to educate myself regarding human nutrition, including the role of calcium in our health. To that end I’ve read a few original research articles as well as several review articles. My situation at the moment is this. While, to some extent, I find Dr. Long’s
points very sound, especially his insistence on the merits of getting one’s calcium from food if at all possible. However, other things he says are incongruent with several of the things that I’ve learned about calcium and bone health. I assume that when speaking of bone health, the overriding issue is the avoidance of osteoporosis and fracture.
First, Dr. Long’s advocacy of, what I gather, continues to be current conventional “wisdom” regarding increasing calcium in one’s diet, seems considerably at odds with scholarly literature as far back as at least 1986. Following are a few excerpts from an article in the Journal of Nutrition (116), 2316-2319, 1986 by D.M. Hegsted.

“The timely note of Gordon and Vaughn (2) emphasizes that there are no data
available to demonstrate that high calcium intakes do, in fact, help prevent
osteoporosis.”

“People who are adapted to high calcium diets are, inevitably, rather ineff-
icient utilizers of dietary calcium.”

“If women in general required 800 mg. calcium/d or more, calcium deficiency
and osteoporosis would be rampant throughout the world.”

“Since the susceptible populations apparently consume more, rather than less
calcium, the epidemiological data do not implicate calcium deficiency as a
cause.” (of osteoporosis)

And from The McDougall Newsletter, February, 2007 (John McDougall, M.D.)

“As long ago as 1978 Paterson wrote in the Post-graduate Medical Journal,
‘Many official bodies give advice on desirable intakes of calcium but no





May 24, 2009
The Editor
Arthritis Advisor

clear evidence of a calcium deficiency disease in otherwise normal people
has ever been given. In Western countries the usual calcium intake is of
the order of 800-1000 mg/day; in many developing countries figures of
300-500 mg/day are found. There is no evidence that people with such a low intake have any problems with bones or teeth. It seems likely that normal
people can adapt to have a normal calcium balance on calcium intakes as
low as 150-200 mg/day and that this adaptation is sufficient even in pregnancy
and lactation…”

I’m under the impression that, for some time now, expert opinion holds that high levels of protein in the Western diet are probably as much to blame for our poor bone health as a deficiency of dietary calcium. I’m confident that Dr. Long is aware of the mechanisms involved in protein causing one to lose calcium. Further, it seems that animal protein is particularly implicated in this problem. As a result, I’m puzzled by Dr. Long’s suggestion that “…products such as milk, cheese and yogurt,…” be relied on as dietary sources of calcium, with no mention of plant-based sources. When one considers the absorbtion issues with dairy products coupled with other problematic factors of humans consuming cow’s milk, it seems as though one’s bones might be better off without dairy at all. Indeed, an editorial in the October, 2006 issue of the British Medical Journal points out, “Populations that consume the most cow’s milk and other dairy products have among the highest rates of osteoporosis and hip fractures in later life.”
Well, probably enough said to convey how one might be puzzled by Dr. Long’s take home message. I noticed your announcement that you value but don’t respond to reader’s letters. That being the case I’d appreciate it if you would send my letter along to Dr. Long. Thanks.




Sincerely,

Alpha, here's a copy of a letter I sent to a newsletter I used to get. Despite my request for a response, I never received one.




May 24, 2009

The Editor
Arthritis Advisor
P.O. Box 5656
Norwalk, CT 06856-5656

Re: June Issue Arthritis Advisor
Bruce Long, M.D. on Calcium

Dear Editor:

I read with interest the piece in the June issue on Calcium with input by Bruce Long, M.D. I’ve recently been trying to educate myself regarding human nutrition, including the role of calcium in our health. To that end I’ve read a few original research articles as well as several review articles. My situation at the moment is this. While, to some extent, I find Dr. Long’s
points very sound, especially his insistence on the merits of getting one’s calcium from food if at all possible. However, other things he says are incongruent with several of the things that I’ve learned about calcium and bone health. I assume that when speaking of bone health, the overriding issue is the avoidance of osteoporosis and fracture.
First, Dr. Long’s advocacy of, what I gather, continues to be current conventional “wisdom” regarding increasing calcium in one’s diet, seems considerably at odds with scholarly literature as far back as at least 1986. Following are a few excerpts from an article in the Journal of Nutrition (116), 2316-2319, 1986 by D.M. Hegsted.

“The timely note of Gordon and Vaughn (2) emphasizes that there are no data
available to demonstrate that high calcium intakes do, in fact, help prevent
osteoporosis.”

“People who are adapted to high calcium diets are, inevitably, rather ineff-
icient utilizers of dietary calcium.”

“If women in general required 800 mg. calcium/d or more, calcium deficiency
and osteoporosis would be rampant throughout the world.”

“Since the susceptible populations apparently consume more, rather than less
calcium, the epidemiological data do not implicate calcium deficiency as a
cause.” (of osteoporosis)

And from The McDougall Newsletter, February, 2007 (John McDougall, M.D.)

“As long ago as 1978 Paterson wrote in the Post-graduate Medical Journal,
‘Many official bodies give advice on desirable intakes of calcium but no





May 24, 2009
The Editor
Arthritis Advisor

clear evidence of a calcium deficiency disease in otherwise normal people
has ever been given. In Western countries the usual calcium intake is of
the order of 800-1000 mg/day; in many developing countries figures of
300-500 mg/day are found. There is no evidence that people with such a low intake have any problems with bones or teeth. It seems likely that normal
people can adapt to have a normal calcium balance on calcium intakes as
low as 150-200 mg/day and that this adaptation is sufficient even in pregnancy
and lactation…”

I’m under the impression that, for some time now, expert opinion holds that high levels of protein in the Western diet are probably as much to blame for our poor bone health as a deficiency of dietary calcium. I’m confident that Dr. Long is aware of the mechanisms involved in protein causing one to lose calcium. Further, it seems that animal protein is particularly implicated in this problem. As a result, I’m puzzled by Dr. Long’s suggestion that “…products such as milk, cheese and yogurt,…” be relied on as dietary sources of calcium, with no mention of plant-based sources. When one considers the absorbtion issues with dairy products coupled with other problematic factors of humans consuming cow’s milk, it seems as though one’s bones might be better off without dairy at all. Indeed, an editorial in the October, 2006 issue of the British Medical Journal points out, “Populations that consume the most cow’s milk and other dairy products have among the highest rates of osteoporosis and hip fractures in later life.”
Well, probably enough said to convey how one might be puzzled by Dr. Long’s take home message. I noticed your announcement that you value but don’t respond to reader’s letters. That being the case I’d appreciate it if you would send my letter along to Dr. Long. Thanks.




Sincerely,

Nervous trigger finger.

I have read that low calcium intake can cause a nervous trigger finger....


Seriously, you wrote a very good letter that deserved a respectful response. As someone has suggested here, perhaps someday most people will be ready to accept the scientific evidence in regard to this just as most seem to now have accepted the fact that smoking really is harmful to health. However, this battle is much more complicated since, as far as I know, the tobacco industry and the medical community never put forth a concerted effort to convince people that cigarettes offered any health benefits.

I recall my aged aunt saying that she smoked for pleasure. As an intelligent person who had smoked for 50 years, she knew that smoking was not healthful...but she was hooked. Consider how different the situation would have been if tobacco companies (similar to the ADA) and many health care professionals had actually lauded the health benefits of cigarettes. Perhaps most people would be smoking today!

Perhaps the youngsters who read this will live long enough to see a major shift in regard to this just as the baby boomers have seen a change in regard to smoking.

Great letter.

This says it all:

“If women in general required 800 mg. calcium/d or more, calcium deficiency
and osteoporosis would be rampant throughout the world.”

I am interested in item related to osteoporosis. My mother has osteoporosis, and Doctor strongly recommended to take dairy products. It was something like, if she wouldn't take dairy products her disease would become worse. I had a lot of problems to convice her that dairy products are not good for her bones and especially for rheumatoid arthritis which she also have.

in fact, I was sure that milk is not good for RA, but I was not sure why it is so bad for osteoporosis.

I read in china study and also I heard it from Dr McDougall that milk has acid effect on our body. But when I look at the list of food (acid or alkaline) milk is somewhat neutral. A lot of grains are more acid than milk. So, can somebody explain it in more detail?

Almost everyone is lactose intolerant. Maybe even everyone past childhood. Continued consumption of lactose in adulthood causes mild to severe problems. People with mild symptoms often have continued regular dairy consumption through their entire life. Their bodies adapt. But people who have severe problems are likely to come from a low dairy consumption family. It is not attributed to race, but rather culture. The more dairy a culture consumes, the fewer those adults become lactose intolerant.

I probably would have never been diagnosed with lactose intolerance, and I never even considered it an issues. However, when I went vegan, I noticed a huge difference. At a party, their was soy and dairy ice cream. I got served the dairy by accident, and I took two bites. I realized it was the dairy and swapped it out for the soy. About an hour later, I could barely stand with the cramps I had. I was in the bathroom for quite a while. I thought I had the flu!

I never thought about having lactose intolerance either, but as soon as I quit eating/drinking dairy, my lifelong sinus problems cleared right up!

I'm beginning to suspect that myself after doing the McDougall diet for six months to see if it would help in my Lyme disease, I decided to go back to more mixed diet (still keeping it very healthy, no sugar, low fat, etc.) due to my doctor feeling I needed more protein. I got a sinus attack that has taken me a month to clear up naturally (netipot largely with some reliance on Xclear nasal spray, oregano tea washes, etc.)

On the protein issue, my doctor may be right when it comes to Lyme disease, as my iron was very low after 6 months on the McDougall diet. I'm an excellent cook and gardener and we really eat well--lots of dark leafy greens, beans, homemade from scratch everything. My DHEA and pregnenolone hormones were also low enough to require supplementation.

I love the McDougall diet, particularly the Fat Free Vegan blog by Susan V for recipe ideas, but I want to get well. Dairy is out at this point. I think it contributes not only to sinus, but bloating and gas that all but went away when I went gluten free (based again on blood tests from my Lyme doctor), so it had to be the dairy. Even with using Lactaid, I think it is causing sinus trouble. I've switched to almond milk due to all the soy hype/scares, and will see how it goes.

I have added eggs to my diet and occasional meat, particularly when we eat out. I'm hoping that my blood work looks better next month when I return to my Lyme disease specialist.

We all want a cure-all in diet. One sides research looks as good as the other. I've looked at both sides pretty extensively. As a result, I decided to just go by how I feel, and my blood work. That, after all, is what we all want. Just to feel well, and be healthy.

Keep us posted on how this works for you, MUL. Of course I WANT to believe that the eggs and meat (more protein) are not necessary. Of course I WANT you to eat them if they make you healthier, MUL!

Why not try a vegan protein powder? I like the hemp and the pea protein. The vanilla pea protein really makes smoothies taste quite good.