Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dancinggirl]

I personally question everything these days.   I feel it is rather foolish to blindly trust banks, HMRC, utility companies, anything in the press and, sadly, even the medical profession. My faith in the NHS has been seriously dented over the last few years with my very mixed experiences - I find it all quite frightening and really worry how I'm going to be treated as I get older and have more ailments.  DG x

[Greyhoundgal]

Well it won't stop me drinking it - love it!  I have a bowl of cereal for breakfast liberally drenched in it and a largish glass at lunchtime as well as what goes in my tea and coffee....

[tiger74]

I immediately ignore any article that says things like 'twice as likely to die'!!  We are ALL 100% likely to die - you cannot increase or decrease your likelihood of dying.  The only question is when and how.  Saying 'twice as likely to die' without giving a comparison is completely meaningless, and either bad science or lazy journalism.  Either way, it makes me turn the page and move on.

Very sensible Scampi. 

Perhaps The Lady magazine is claiming to have discovered the secret to eternal life? 

CLKD - have you written to the editor?  Will be interesting to see if you receive  response.

[Rowan]

The evidence is mounting up about the consumption of milk not being as healthy as we have been led to believe, nor that calcium alone is protective of bones.

http://www.pcrm.org/good-medicine/2012/autumn2012/got-truth-the-dairy-industrys-junk-science

I think it is grossly unfair to attack "The Lady" magazine which is one of the longest running women's magazine with a very good reputation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_(magazine)

tiger47 you yourself said

"Yep, the jury is most definitely out on the merits of milk, especially cow's milk and varying opinions within the scientific community and elsewhere"

I don't think "The Lady" has anything to answer too. All they have done written about published scientific findings, to my mind that is not lazy journalism.

[Hurdity]

Here is the original article in the BMJ for anyone who wants to read it:
http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g6015

It can be downloaded as pdf - it's quite complex! The comments and response from the authors are also interesting but I can't pretend to understand it all 

As always the conclusions of an observational study based on self-completed questionnaires (ie no control over diet etc or whether respondents were truthful), are very limited, and as pointed out causal explanations cannot be determined as there are many confounding factors.

Unfortunately, even with published and peer-reviewed studies in reputabale journals it is also the case that the media will often tend to pick out a conclusion or observation to create a sensational headline without also suggesting results should be interpreted with caution - which the (scientific) paper's authors did in this case.

At least the Telegraph, while still reporting the conclusions in an unnecessarily sensationalist headline, expressed caution with the last words in the article:

Dr Louis Levy, of Public Health England, said: “The authors advise caution in interpreting the results and are not recommending that anyone stops drinking milk or eating dairy products.”

Hurdity x

[CLKD]

You really didn't read what I quoted  - my point is that the article in The Lady did not tell anyone anything.  As DH, a Research Chemist reacted, 'they have cherry picked to fill a small gap on the page'.

My point was that "The Lady" have printed something 'lifted' without telling the reader anything.  People may well read the headline and stop drinking milk altogether ………


Thanks Hurdity - I will read the Link once the stresses of today have worn away  ……..

[as an aside: There's another person been mis-quoted by the media this week  -  this time relating to the football World Cup ] ……...

[Rowan]

Nobody had suggested stopping drinking milk, just the over consumption.

'There is a lot of the worlds population who don't consume cows's milk especially those who don't have the enzyme to digest it. I have never read about it being dangerous not drinking milk.

My Niece and sister have completely controlled their eczema by stopping drinking milk, I was sceptical until I saw the results, nothing the NHS provided helped. Goats Cheese surprisingly does not make any difference.

There are loads of ways to get calcium besides drinking milk.

I didn't miss the point at all CLKD, I just think being outraged about the article in "The Lady" was overreacting. Sorry.

[Limpy]

You really didn't read what I quoted  - my point is that the article in The Lady did not tell anyone anything.

Why the angry face?

Are you wanting us to castigate the Lady because it has given an opinion you don't like?

The article in the Lady was only doing what journals and news programmes do, i.e. be very selective about the facts or opinions they put forward. They never seem to have bothered much with truth or accuracy, it's just the way it is.

If they had cited references and given full data breakdowns it's unlikely it would have been read, it's a light magazine when all's said and done. New Scientist doesn't give full references or data sources, perhaps we should forgive the Lady for not doing so either?

[tiger74]

I share CLKD's view that it's unprofessional of the magazine to publish the results of scientific research without citing references and in such scant detail as to make it almost meaningless.  I believe CLKD's original point was not the findings of the research per se but the way it was reported in the magazine.  I actually don't care what the findings of the research were, I made my mind up about my personal consumption of cow's milk long ago but I echo CLKD's concern that a reputable publication has apparently printed a supposedly "scientific" article in such a way. 

The claim that by some action someone is "twice as likely to die" is completely nonsensical and I find the absurdity of it hilarious.  (As has been pointed out, we all have a 100% chance of dying, unless an eternal life is indeed possible).  If this is a direct quote from The Lady magazine then I think the journalist needs to go back to school, as does the editor who presumably passed it for publication.

[Winterose]

I remember reading somewhere that cows milk was for baby cows!

[Rowan]

True winterose, then they are weaned and then eat grass!

The Lady is not the only magazine that has reported it in its précis form and its all over the internet if you want to read about it as well as many books written about the subject.

From the scientific study

Quote

Conclusion

A higher consumption of milk in women and men is not accompanied by a lower risk of fracture and instead may be associated with a higher rate of death. Consequently, there may be a link between the lactose and galactose content of milk and risk as suggested in our hypothesis, although causality needs be tested using experimental study designs. Our results may question the validity of recommendations to consume high amounts of milk to prevent fragility fractures.3 71 72 The results should, however, be interpreted cautiously given the observational design of our study. The findings merit independent replication before they can be used for dietary recommendations. 

As usual even from a scientific study open to interpretation, something I have observed in many scientific studies even about about HRT.

I honestly find the indignation and out cry about the " The Lady" report absurd.

[Winterose]

 I love the Lady too, just reading the sits vac at the back is highly entertaining.

[Rowan]

I do too and hardly a celeb in sight.

Its gentle and quietly elegant.

[oldsheep]

I'm intolerant of so many foods but not dairy. Love milk. I drown my gluten free granola in it, drink lattes and have it in my (many cups of) tea.
I have such a restricted diet that I won't let anybody take away my milk. It's the one and only product that I buy the organic version though.