Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
Science / Re: drinking milk and dying earlier
« Last post by TylerDurden on January 14, 2019, 04:57:05 pm »
AV was a fraud to a partial extent. When challenged, he made up claims about doing a multitude of studies showing how healthy raw animal foods were, and when asked to produce them, claimed they had all been burned in  a fire.  I mean, this is a guy who borrowed from the bible( re 40 days and 40 nights in the desert!).
Science / Re: drinking milk and dying earlier
« Last post by TylerDurden on January 14, 2019, 04:27:43 pm »
They can "target" whatever they want. They base their whole analysis on survey data from various countries according to the comparative levels of consumption of cooked dairy. It's not me who has to prove that raw dairy wouldn't cause any problems. That's not how science works.
All this is solid evidence against dairy with multiple studies, not just surveys. By contrast, all we have are a few studies showing that raw dairy may be helpful against  asthma in some cases. Pathetic, really.

Gotcha. So meat is very different when going from raw to cooked, but dairy isn't, because you hate dairy.
  I had simply pointd out the obvious that meat is not the same thing as dairy, whether raw or cooked.

And the meat of a deer is meant to help the deer run around. What's that got to do with anything?
  A foolish analogy  as meat is not the same thing as raw dairy. Or to use your lack of logic ad absurdum, the leg of a deer would be useless for another species to graft on in place of a missing limb as the immune system would react against it, causing rejection of tissue, among many other health-problems.

It's only absurd to you because you didn't understand it. All you can do is name a few species from animals of a completely different class. 
  Another false claim. For one thing it has been pointed out that the reason for why feral children raised by wolves could not happen in real-life is because  wolves`milk is toxic for human infants, due to excess casein in it. Also, online it has been reported that sheep, goats and chimps that are fed cows’ milk sometimes develop leukemia.


How does that make them unscientific? Again, I think you don't understand what something being unscientific means. In fact it's you who is using unscientific reasoning by claiming to have proven that raw dairy is harmful because some people have some evidence to suggest cooked dairy might be.
  It is unscientific because cats were used not humans in the test. Cats are not humans Indeed, the thalidomide crisis was caused by the fact that the scientists were wrongly reassured by more positive tests done on animals. And the studies I mentioned did NOT focus on the issue of raw vs pasteurised but on the issue of excess calcium. Ironically, since pasteurisation makes calcium less absorbable in the body than with raw dairy, raw dairy is clearly worse as regards the excess calcium issue.

This has nothing to do with "scientific rigor". Nobody is arguing that a diet of pure dairy is superior to other diets. That would be like telling someone who claims that some salt is healthy to put test animals on a 100% salt diet, with no other nutrients being fed to them.
  Well, that is at least something. You accept that raw dairy is not a complete food, like meat is, and is harmful  as 100% of the diet.

The studies showed basically the same result on 2/3 dairy as 1/3 dairy.
  Wrong. The meat study showed that even including raw dairy as 1/3 of  a diet including cooked meat was not enough to counter the ill-health effects of cooked meat. Pretty useless, really.

No, it was after. And in any case, they wouldn't have been fed dairy on a regular basis. Their feed was primarily the rodents and birds they'd catch, which is why they were kept around in the first place. They weren't pets.
  Complete bollocks. Cats were kept as pets for countless millenia and were fed by humans on the foods that humans themselves ate, including raw dairy. I could cite ancient egypt as an example, but keeping cats as pets not rodent-catchers goes WAY further back. Incidentally, you should know that human rat-catchers use terriers, not cats, for hunting rats as cats are not very good at hunting rats.

You keep reading whatever you want into what I say. I didn't say there is more difference between a cat and a human than between a human and a cow. I said there's more difference in dygestive abilities between a cat an a cow, than between a human and a cow.
   Irrelevant, really. What we need to convince you is a study of cats fed on cat milk compared to cats fed on cows milk, all raw.

That's because you're misunderstanding the actual goal of the breeding. Intelligence isn't always the best trait to have, just like for humans, it doesn't matter that much if cows aren't in perfect health, as long as they give us better health. Also, many of these problems are due to these animals being fed unnatural diets in modern times.
  It matters a great deal. If an animal is in bad health, then the meat, and especially, the milk will be harmful. For example, I have heard of mothers transmitting diseases to their babies via their breastmilk.

Designed by who? God? Because if so, well then God probably also designed us with the ability to farm cattle and get their milk. If you mean designed by natural selection, well then again, we've selected the cows to give us better milk for us, too.
  Wrong again, human breeding, or rather inbreeding for dysgenic traits, is not the same as natural selection. It is wholly unnatural. Like we see with cooking, unnatural processes are harmful to human health.

I didn't say it doesn't differ. Btw, in that link it kinda looks like they're not very different at all. Definitely way more similar to each other than all the other milks from all the other mammals around.

Also, keep in mind that the selection of cow milk may not be to suit the needs of baby humans the best, but adult humans.
  Cows milk is a ruminant milk. To get healthier milk, one would have to drink chimpanzee milk as a human. As regards babies,  most humans gradually develop more and more lactose intolerance over time as adults, as adult mammals are not supposed to be drinkng milk, however raw, past infancy.

Looking at people's teeth is quick and easy, and through his studies he found that this correlated to general health in peoples whom he had studied more in deph. Also, look at Pottenger's studies again. Tooth decay corresponds with all the other health problems caused by the cooked foods diet.
  Tooth decay is also mainly caused by excess sugar and processed foods. So the absence of such foods, rather than the raw dairy is the most likely cause for good dental health. I am suspicious of WP as he was very selective in his photos. I mean, given a lack of dentists and the incidence of disease and famine, it is impossible for more than a few HGs to have had perfect teeth throughout their lives.
They were also stronger than modern day hunter gatherers. There's many other reasons to explain this, rather than simply blame dairy. They were cooking more of their foods, for starters, even if they weren't eating much grains.[/quote]  It at least shows that raw dairy is so useless as a health-food that it cannot counteract the consumption of cooked animal foods.

Not really. Bread and other grains and legumes have always been associated with the poor. In the middle ages the nobility would use bread as a plate to serve food in, they didn't eat it, they just gave it to the poor to eat after the meal.
This is simply not true. Poor people would poach wild animals to get meat. They would also seek out frogs legs and raw oysters and lobsters  and wild mushrooms, all of which were deemed disgusting poor-man`s food centuries ago.  And upper classes did indeed eat bread as a staple.
Science / Re: drinking milk and dying earlier
« Last post by van on January 14, 2019, 04:55:32 am »
'fifty percent of the calcium in milk is cauterized when past...'   where does he get that number?   Are there labs on this report?   AV repeatedly made similar claims without ever showing where he got the information.  Since most of us know the word cauterized from movies or stories about how in years past wounds were cauterized on say a battlefield, the image/word carries weight and emotional strength. 
   Until I ever see any conclusive proof backing up these claims AV makes, I will simply repeat my claims that AV made up anything to back up his beliefs.  And suggest to others here to suspect the same. 
  Also question his statement that cream is the ONLY,  I repeat ONLY fat that nutrifies the brain and nervous system.  Come on think about this statement in the context of those peoples who don't keep cows.    Again, 'we' want so badly to believe him because we want so badly to have the Answer.
Science / Re: drinking milk and dying earlier
« Last post by PaganGoy on January 13, 2019, 04:33:29 pm »
There are sources to support the claims made by ajanous regarding bone health and so on in this free pdf
Science / Re: drinking milk and dying earlier
« Last post by PaganGoy on January 13, 2019, 04:16:23 pm »
"Dairy, ultimately, is meant to sustain and help infants of the very species it is created from, that's all."
autism much?
A page from the ww2l members area

Raw Milk is Safe But Beware of Big Commercial Milks
 July 29, 2014  admin  Subscriber Content   
Viewed 12 times since 15 July 2018
Raw Milks are Safe and Nutritious but Beware of Big Commercial Milks

Aajonus Vonderplanitz

Okay, milk. Delicious, wonderful milk. Milk is one of the most nutritious foods there is.


Besides the egg, it is the most easily digestible. It only takes 6 - 10 hours to digest - raw milk of course.


Once it’s pasteurized, 50% of the calcium is cauterized. That means it’s hardened into a substance that can’t be utilized to do what it’s supposed to do in the body, including building healthy tissue.


It has a tendency to build brittle bones and dry tissue when you’re drinking pasteurized milk.


Milk is the most easily digested food, next to eggs. It only takes 6 - 10 hours. It’s already liquid, so the body doesn’t have to do much with hydrochloric acid or any of the digestive juices. What it will do is infiltrate with bacteria and as I said earlier, bacteria is the main process of digestion so all it has to do is infiltrate it.


Egg is the most digestible and that digests in a matter of 27 minutes. Again, it doesn’t require any hydrochloric acid or digestive juices to pre-digest it, to break larger particles of food down into smaller particles of food so that bacteria can eat it - consume it.


And of course, their waste is our food.


If you buy regular milk from a big milk company, you’ll notice that they say it’s milk, fat-free. That’s because they will take the milk, they’ll remove all animal fat from it and they will put oils and esters in place of it. They’re usually vegetable oils, and remember what I said about vegetable oils - they will crystallize and harden in the body. So when you’re drinking a very well-known, famous brand of milk, what they’ve basically done is taken the milk, they’ve deprived it of protein and they’ve deprived it of the fats. And it’s a blue liquid. It has no relationship to milk at all and it will have a very long shelf-life.


So then what they do is they take dolomite - mined calcium, calcium concentrated rock - and they shovel it into the vats to turn this blue fluid back into a white fluid. It’s all a hoax: there is no relationship to milk at all in it. Plus they use hydrogenated vegetable oils which are plastic. So you have something that is totally foreign and chemical, and it isn’t milk at all.


The only place you can get totally pure raw milk is from a farmer who produces raw milk. There are a few states you can get it commercially in stores, but not many: California is one, and you can go into some stores… Whole Foods is a joke again. Whole Foods stopped carrying raw milk in California when they could. They say it’s an insurance issue. It has nothing to do with insurance, they’ve carried insurance before. I talked to the insurance company and they are very willing to continue to insure that food, just like they insure the meats and everything else. So, raw milk is a wonderful food, it helps calm the body. The cream in it is the only fat that completely nutrifies the brain and nervous system. Butter can do it about two thirds, but raw cream and milk does it 100%.
Primal Diet / Re: A1 versus A2 dairy, any difference?
« Last post by norawnofun on January 13, 2019, 04:19:06 am »
Thanks for ur inputs. I would like to try and go the non-dairy route to see of any improvements. So far, things were only going uphill since carnivore, but I think you can always improve things. And being a slave to dairy ain´t no fun. I´m way too dependent on that and I want it to stop. And because I want more mental clarity, but if your digestion is blocked then you don´t have that. Therefore dairy up until now was the only way to somewhat have a good digestion and stay a bit focused. I did fasts only twice. Once a juice fast for 5 days, and once a broth fast for 1 and a half days. Nearly passed out on the broth, never attempted that again. I don´t like fasts because you loose weight, and every kilo counts for me. But I guess I have no choice if I want to turn things around and get the stomach acid back to its origin. Or I do it very slowly. Cut out more and more dairy, replace it with fat, eat very small portions. I also think that the goat dairy I have is pretty much hindering things, since its more alkaline. When I have cow milk things are going much better since its acidic and fattier.
Omnivorous Raw Paleo Diet / Exorphines in Butter
« Last post by True on January 13, 2019, 01:49:28 am »
Do you experience any mood-changes, that might be related to exorphins after eating butter from grass-fed animals? I ate grain-fed chicken liver two weeks ago and my brain stopped working and it felt horrible and I never want to go back to being exorphin-addicted.
Primal Diet / Re: A1 versus A2 dairy, any difference?
« Last post by sabertooth on January 12, 2019, 12:05:56 pm »

The ideal case is that I can eat more fatty cuts of meat, but the problem is I can´t digest them yet, as my stomach acid is still not strong enough, plus I need a ratio of about 60 fat to 40 protein or more, otherwise digestion is bad. Ideally I would eat cheap fatty cuts, or osso buco which has the bone marrow included, together with some lard or tallow. Raw fat is too hard to digest and where I live there are no healthy animals around. So the only way would be the osso and the fatty cuts, or homemade bacon in extra fat. I´d like to phase out dairy a bit, by eating less dairy but with higher fat content, like butter.

How did you achieve turning away from dairy and how did your body take it? You just stopped all of a sudden? And how was your digestion? Sabertooth said to go on a 2 day water fast to possibly reset the microbiome. Did you do something like that?

I also noticed how dairy would entirely inhibit my ability to digest raw animal fats. Drinking milk with fatty meat would make it seem like the meat is just swimming in the milk and not digesting fully.  I tried limiting the amount of meat and fat while drinking larger amounts and lessening the fat. It helped a little, but overall my gut never felt right with dairy no matter the protocol or ratio.

I believe the enzymes and probiotics that work to digest raw animal fat are squelched out by dairy, especially in people like myself who were enzymatically insufficient. After a week or so of drinking milk daily the fats begin to pass through entirely undigested, and I lose my cravings for any extra fats. The milk sugar seems to throw me out of keto, and though temporarily it will give me energy and stimulate hunger and weight gain... it leads to episodes of hypoglycemia, digestive distress, and a host of other symptoms which lead me to abstain altogether.

Using dairy for only short periods, I could usually rebalance the gut within a week or so...I imagine someone who relied on it for longer periods of time, while never truly adapting to high levels of animal fat, would have a much more difficult time eliminating it from the diet. It could take up to three weeks to rid the gut of the milk sugars, fats, proteins, and microbes that inhibit adaptation to raw animal fat digestion.

I recommend a short term fast to help jumpstart the keto process, but its important to not starve yourself, three days water fast max, and to make sure you have the best fatty meats available once dairy has been eliminated. Try to obtain a variety of different fats... marrow, caul fat, suet, brain, sweet breads, tongue. Beware of cooked fats like tallow and lard, especially from unknown sources.

Once the body becomes starved for overall calories and has no other alternative, then it will be much more eager to rev up the long dormant keto metabolism. If you can get past the hurdle of raw fat digestion, then everything becomes much easier to balance. For me I can eat copious amounts of Raw fat, but there may have been some anomaly which isn't shared by most people. Before starting the Raw paleo diet I experimented with a high fat vegan diet, where everything was covered with olive or coconut oil. I spent a month eating low glycemic vegetables covered with plant fats. After weeks of enduring such an abusive dietary regimen, raw animal fats were easy to breakdown. Around the same time ealy into the transition I was using coconut butter to supplement fat, because of the lean goat meat I was eating didn't have enough. Raw Coconut butter seemed to help prime my fat burning metabolism, and I still to this day eat a couple of tablespoons with my meals...though again I could be as much an anomaly as the coconut itself.
Primal Diet / Re: A1 versus A2 dairy, any difference?
« Last post by van on January 12, 2019, 10:32:46 am »
I went from dairy to 80/10, which ruined my health.  Luckily I read on the internet how some, if not many, will continue with a believed in way of eating even to the point of ruining their health.  I took that expression to heart.  I then switched to using fat as fuel and haven't really eaten much fruit at all now for many years.  that first weekend, all I could do is lay on the couch with little ability to utilize fat.  And then it just got easier...

   I have to admit I probably couldn't live this way unless I had a source of non-rancid grass fed yummy fat and marrow.   So I can sympathize with you there. 
   My Guess is that all this milk in combination with meat isn't helping your body to learn how to switch to fat as a fuel.  Same as if I continued to eat fruit.  the sugar kicks you out of being a fat burner.    That's about all I can offer.
Welcoming Committee / Re: Greetings from Norway
« Last post by TylerDurden on January 11, 2019, 10:25:38 pm »
That‘s great. Bear in mind, though, that many decades of eating cooked foods will take its toll on you via detox. The longer on cooked foods you are among other factors, the worse the detox will be, likely. Plus there are other factors.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk