Posts by driftinggull13

placidfox55 said:You're right that you can burn off calories through physical activity.

but just ask your grandma how much milk a single farmhouse actually gets from a barn with just two cows. First, the calf has to get its share, then the kids need their portion, and whatever little bit is left over goes toward making cream, buttermilk, yogurt, or cheese...

How much milk do adults even manage to get for themselves in a day back then? How much cheese are they really slapping onto a slice of bread before heading out to work the fields?

(If there’s no grandma around, let me answer: 😬) Not much.

So, back in those days when people were actually moving around constantly, they weren't stuffing themselves with calories from dairy products. Heck, on an authentic Italian pizza, you aren't going to see nearly as much cheese as we see in this modern era. Why? It's not because some ancient Italian was obsessing over his cholesterol intake, it's simply because cheese was scarce—or just plain expensive.

Here in the States, the dairy industry has spent decades hyping up the benefits of milk and calcium (you know, through those famous "Got Milk?" ads where celebrities pose with those fake white milk mustaches... which is basically just white paint).

Milk is a great source of calcium, sure. But there are plenty of other fantastic sources of calcium that come with way less animal fat (which, honestly, even a toddler knows we should be avoiding these days). And like the article points out perfectly: olive oil, fatty fish, and walnuts are much better ways to get your healthy fats.

And if you're looking for protein, peas (including soy), fish, and chicken are superior options.

Oh, give me a break... "better source of protein are peas"—I'm sorry, but meat is a much better source of protein. Actually, meat has essential amino acids that peas mostly lack, so why on earth would I eat peas for protein when I can just eat meat? Besides, the fat in milk isn't an issue for anyone who eats a balanced diet and does any kind of regular physical activity. Milk provides calcium, fats, proteins, minerals, and vitamins... and honestly, why the hell should I be eating peas or anything else on your list instead of milk when I can just drink milk?
I seriously don't get the logic here. What is your actual problem with milk? Is it the animal welfare stuff or what?

I’m not even angry, really, but that piece in The New York Post is such a pile of garbage that it practically rolls out the red carpet for soy corporations and anyone trying to push those other supplements... it's honestly pathetic.
Animals would drink milk if they could actually get to it, but they can't, so what? That whole argument holds zero water because an apple isn't designed for human consumption—it’s designed to reproduce the apple tree—so does that make eating an apple "unnatural"? Please.
When you look at the volume and intake, just compare how much milk a calf drinks relative to its weight gain in percentages, and you won't find a number that's significantly different from a human child's needs. If a calf gains two or three times its weight, a child will follow a similar trajectory, plus, the composition of the milk you're drinking isn't identical to what a calf gets, otherwise we wouldn't even have cream or cheese to begin with.
Allergies and lactose intolerance are a completely different conversation, but that doesn't change the actual properties of milk; those are just glitches in the human organism. People are allergic to strawberries, but does that mean a strawberry isn't healthy?
I'll say it again: humans have been feeding children cow's milk for millions of years, and has anything bad happened? Milk is, nutritionally speaking, the best food item in existence. The ratios of fats, proteins, carbs, and the specific types of vitamins and minerals far surpass any other food out there. Don't get mad at me, but a local CVS pharmacy sells supplements, not milk. That whole data point is nonsense written purely for marketing reasons. Isn't the entire history of humanity before supplements existed enough proof for everyone, including you and me? 😉
just a little disclaimer so you know I'm not mad, here we go 😘

Of course it’s impossible. That’s just what happens when people spend all their time scrolling through those mindless clickbait sites instead of actually bothering to look at some real physiology...😉

Laura Hernandez8 said:I'm pretty sure milk was definitely the cause of all those issues... ever since I cut it out, things have improved drastically. Honestly, I think I might go back to total abstinence.
Nice little feature on our topic in The New York Post...

This article is a pile of garbage and just crawls with inaccuracies and pure nonsense, especially that crap about acne... And besides, claiming milk isn't good because it contains some specific thing it shouldn't have is just like saying soy is bad because it's treated with herbicides. The whole point of the piece should be the soy, but they missed the mark entirely... all that soy talk really gets under my skin. People have been growing up on milk for millions of years and now suddenly these geniuses show up claiming it's somehow wrong. You should probably check out people in the Caucasus region to see if it's actually an issue, where they're famous for consuming massive amounts of... soy, right? And milk is caloric!!! Well, obviously, how else would it work as food for infants? What’s even the big deal with calories? The problem is lazy asses who don't want to move a muscle at the gym, not the milk...😉 For people like that, they might as well just drink water for months on end. I mean, seriously, they managed to blame obesity on milk instead of their own lazy butts and uncontrolled diets...

Steven Green2 said:What kind of quoted statement are you even talking about... because honestly, I feel like I've been repeating myself for an hour now and nobody seems to be following the thread... 😕

I’m talking about that same person I quoted in my last post... honestly, I can't tell if you actually get what I'm saying when you claim to understand me. You agree with everything I lay out, and then suddenly you're jumping in to say three liters is too much. Like, who are you to decide that's too much for him? If he’s a bodybuilder, there's no way it's overkill, and even if he was just some average guy hitting the gym once in a while, it still wouldn't be an issue... but whatever, I think we both know what we were trying to get at here, so I'm done wasting my breath on this...🙂

Steven Green2 said:I couldn't care less about Eskimos, or Africans, or Asians, or Europeans, or even thin people or malnourished folks... 🙂

See, this right here is where we actually hit a wall. You’re looking at this through such a tiny little lens that your whole take on healthier low-fat milk just comes off as completely clueless. Honestly, you might as well have just said you’re lactose intolerant and therefore all milk is poison... You don't actually have a single real argument to back up that claim, other than just obsessively pointing to yourself—your own lifestyle or whatever you want to call it... I have to say, that "quote" of yours is honestly pretty terrifying to me. I personally could never bring myself to say something like that in any context whatsoever...

Steven Green2 said:If I recall correctly, we were talking about drinking 3 liters of milk every single day for your entire life here. So let's say you go with 3.2% fat, which works out to about 96 grams of milk fat. You’re trying to tell me that’s somehow fine for daily consumption? When I mentioned that low-fat milk might be better than whole milk, I was specifically talking about consuming massive quantities like that. Look, having a glass of whole milk once in a while isn't the issue, but 3 liters?! By some twisted logic, if you're already downing 3 liters, shouldn't you aim for 27 grams of fat instead of 96? I was looking at what was happening in this thread—while you were busy lecturing everyone about "healthy" versus "unhealthy" food and starving people in Africa... Honestly, I don't care how you nutritionists define healthy or unhealthy food, because I still can't get past your claim that something is "healthier" just because it has fewer calories... we could look at a typical, average-weight European for example.😬

I have no clue what an "average European" even looks like to you... are we talking about someone in London, or maybe somewhere in Eastern Europe? And why do you feel the need to bring up starving people in Africa? Just look around you, man... seriously. Less than 5% of the population is obese, yet over 40% of the world is facing malnutrition. Obesity is a Western disease that's really only spiked in the last 20 or 30 years. People have been drinking liters upon liters of full-fat milk—like buffalo or mare milk, which has way more fat than cow milk—for literally thousands of years, and now we have these "geniuses" who sit on their couches all day coming out of nowhere to claim it's an unhealthy food. Give me a break. Change your lifestyle instead of declaring milk to be "unhealthy." And how are you supposed to know the context of the guy who started this "unhealthy" thread? For all we know, he’s a marathon runner or a pro athlete. Someone like that could eat half a kilo of fat a day and wouldn't gain a pound or see their cholesterol spike. The only thing that actually matters is the ratio of intake to expenditure... everything else is just mindless noise. Listen, arguing like this is pointless, and I'll say it for the third and final time: there is no such thing as "unhealthy food," there is only "unhealthy eating." If you weigh 300 pounds, even an apple is basically just calories to you.
I'm done arguing about this.

feralbadger8 said:Alright, driftinggull13, just do me a favor and tell me—what's the actual functional value of even a single gram of saturated fat from milk? (Other than just adding calories for Africans, obviously.)

And what exactly do you mean by "functional value"? Are we talking kilojoules or just calories...

Steven Green2 said:Oh sure, just go ahead and gorge yourself on saturated fats and have a blast. But don't come crying to me when you wake up one day facing massive cholesterol issues in your blood plasma... I was simply pointing out that the body doesn't actually need saturated fats and that they're bad for you. Be my guest though, nobody's stopping you. 😉

See, this is exactly what I mean... you just don't get it, you really don't. It's like saying the body doesn't need water because if you drank 50 gallons a day it would actually kill you. Does that suddenly make water unhealthy? I think I made my point pretty clear enough in my last post, but I guess you have to actually put in some effort to follow along...😉 😁

Grace Rodriguez10 said:You convinced me (regarding those starving people in Africa). But we aren't hungry, and we aren't in Africa. Besides, about 50% of Europeans are overweight. So, according to your logic, lower-calorie milk is better for them.

No, absolutely not, it's actually the exact opposite... I'm telling you, there is NO SUCH THING as unhealthy food, there is only UNHEALTHY EATING. Full-fat milk is perfectly healthy and good, but if you're just gorging yourself on fat, then it isn't—but then nothing else with fat would be healthy either, right? It has nothing to do with the milk itself... Is that clear enough now?😉
It’s the same way you could claim milk is unhealthy just because some people are lactose intolerant. For them, sure, it's not healthy, but for everyone else, it is. Same thing goes for saying strawberries are unhealthy just because some people have allergies. It's a stupid argument, obviously.
Just like that nonsense about "healthier" low-fat milk.😁 😛

Steven Green2 said:What does calorie count even have to do with whether something is healthy or not?! Low-fat milk is obviously better than whole milk just because there's less dairy fat involved. Dairy fat is a saturated fat, and from a health standpoint, it’s one of the least desirable things you can put in your diet. Your body doesn't need it at all, not even in tiny amounts. 😉

Oh, please, give me a break... since when did having saturated fats in your diet become "unhealthy"? Maybe if you were, I don't know, carrying 400 pounds and never leaving your couch—I'm exaggerating, obviously—it might matter, but otherwise... Saturated fats are a fundamental part of nutrition and they show up in tons of animal-based foods, so what, does that make all those foods bad too? I bet someone starving in Africa or Asia would get way more satisfaction out of whole milk than low-fat stuff just because of the calories alone... At the end of the day, there aren't really "unhealthy foods," there's just unhealthy ways of eating. Whatever... 😉

Grace Rodriguez10 I can't even begin to wrap my head around what they're saying here... it's just one thing after another with these people... honestly, I don't know why I even bother reading this stuff sometimes... it's like they aren't even trying to make sense anymore... anyway...
I’ve been seeing people go on about this non-stop lately, and honestly, it just drives me up the wall... the idea that low-fat milk is somehow the "healthy" choice compared to full-fat is just one of those things that makes you want to stare at a wall for an hour. It’s like we collectively decided decades ago that fat was the enemy without actually sitting down to look at the science, and now we're all just living in this weird, processed reality where everything has been stripped down until there's nothing left but water and disappointment... I don't know, maybe I'm just getting old and cranky, but it feels like we're constantly being told to fear the very things our bodies actually need to function properly... turns out, when you take the cream out, you're often just left with a bunch of additives and sugar to make it taste less like cardboard... it's exhausting...☕

That’s just not how it works, because if we’re following that same broken logic, then water is somehow "healthier" than low-fat milk, or maybe eating sand is better than eating a salad... since you know, sand... doesn't have any calories...😉 😬

Drew Mitchell55 said:it's all nonsense... I mean, how am I not allergic to anything when I've been drinking milk for 20 years, mostly pasteurized for the last 10... at least half a liter every single day... 🙄

Well, that’s an easy one right there, you just aren't drinking enough of it. You need at least two point seven liters minimum, and make sure it's pasteurized. Because honestly, pasteurization is the root of all evil...
😍 😉

casualfox9 said:And after just one year of milk treatments, they'll end up allergic to every single plant on the planet...

Get a load of that: "Treatments"!!!!!! And not just a few things or even a bunch of stuff, but EVERYTHING! Real genius move right there...
👍 👍 👍

dustycanyon6 said:What’s your actual angle here? What are you even trying to accomplish? Pasteurization kills the good stuff in milk—so you're really telling me you'd sit there and chug three liters of pasteurized milk every single day? Unbelievable...

Cut the nonsense!!! Like everyone else has already pointed out, maybe go actually look up what pasteurization does to food...

You don't need some nutritionist breathing down your neck; you can drink three liters of milk a day if you want...

placidowl6 said:Is it okay if I drink 3 liters of milk a day without wrecking my health?

I read somewhere that drinking too much milk could actually cause liver cirrhosis... is there any truth to that? Am I going overboard with my plan to chug this stuff? Please, give me some actual arguments here, God knows I need them.

It’s not gonna cause cirrhosis unless you already have something going on that would trigger it, so yeah, go ahead and drink it. 96 grams of dairy fat? So what? Big deal...

Bill Gates said:once you've downed a massive amount of booze, the next day you're just absolutely wiped and starving... 🤔 personally, last night I had a few beers and didn't even feel nauseous, and honestly, I didn't even end up throwing up or anything... 😬 but man, early this morning, I got hit with such a brutal hangover... 🙄 🤔

From what I recall about how the body processes alcohol—you know, turning it into aldehydes and then into acid before finally flushing it out of your system—it takes a ton of water to handle that chemical reaction... those aldehydes are usually what give you that pounding headache, and since alcohol is a diuretic anyway, you're losing fluids left and right too. I'm not saying I'm some medical expert or anything, but that's basically how it works...

I honestly have no clue what the actual source document says, but everything being reported here sounds like absolute nonsense to me... just total garbage.
It changes food at a molecular level... well, yeah, obviously, just like any other way you heat stuff up. Standard heating works via convection... or surface contact?????? What kind of ridiculous logic is that? When you cook something, you’re heating the whole item, and it reaches boiling temperature pretty fast, otherwise, it’d just stay raw. Sure, the internal temp might be slightly lower at first, but then you just have to cook it longer.
Normal heating basically just ramps up the rotational and vibrational energy of the molecules, so some bonds break, some properties change, some proteins coagulate, and so on. A microwave does the exact same thing, it just hits all the molecules more or less at once instead of starting from the surface and working its way in. I really don't see why anyone thinks that would be harmful...
And this part about cholesterol dropping... since when is that a bad thing? 😉
Also, is it leukocytosis or a drop in white blood cell counts? Leukocytosis means an *increase* in white blood cells, not a decrease like they claimed in the first half of that sentence. And even if it were true, why on earth would that mean microwave food is acting like a foreign object in the body?
I don't know, the translation seems incredibly sloppy, especially the conclusions, and I honestly don't think whoever translated this had any idea what they were actually reading. It probably wouldn't hurt to just provide a link to the original article instead

Alex Ramirez56 said:Milk is actually great for adults, and cows drink it too. A lot of people find that once they finish their growing years, milk starts bothering their stomachs.

🙂 Oh, this is just brilliant... So, since cows eat grass, if we follow this absolutely flawless logic, I guess adults should all just start eating grass too, right? Just munching on lawn clippings all day...
It’s funny, because I’m getting up there in age myself, and I know plenty of grown adults, yet not a single one of them has an issue with dairy.
I guess my definition of "a lot of people" is just wildly different from yours...😉

frozenlynx33 said:In

There she goes again, acting all high and mighty... honestly, both in her head and on the screen, I can't even be bothered to quote that massive wall of text you dumped here. Let me repeat myself, since you clearly aren't grasping the point...
1. Just because someone has been doing something for years doesn't make them right.
2. People spend their time studying alternative medicine or cellular nutrition, so what? People also spend their time believing the Earth is flat or obsessing over garden gnomes and other nonsense, but does "being involved" suddenly make those things true?
2. Bringing up "one professional journal" isn't a counter-argument, it's just a weak attempt at one.
3. The pharmaceutical industry is incredibly powerful even in places where traditional medicine is king, like China or India. If people think they have a monopoly because they have amazing traditional roots, well... they're just falling for the lobbyist talk....
4. I haven't been sick, and whether I will be is a whole different story, but look—you eat healthy and you still get sick (not counting the "you'll get sick later" part), so stop preaching about diet and its supposed massive impact on health. Of course it matters, but obesity from poor eating habits is a much bigger issue than anything else, which ultimately isn't about the food itself but the actual habits we have. There is no such thing as "unhealthy food"—provided it’s hygienic and non-toxic—there is only unhealthy eating.
5. The pharma industry is going to research whatever turns a profit, just like any other business. Whether it's a medicinal compound pulled from a plant, a mulberry, a slug, or frozenlynx33's brain, or something cooked up in a lab, they don't care. They stopped researching plants because the margins are too small or they aren't potent enough. All these other "arguments" regarding Big Pharma are just total garbage, nothing more than some neighborhood gossip based on how people imagine the industry works. I guess the "healthy" food industry, alternative medicine, and herbalism are all just charitable organizations instead of actual businesses, huh?
🙂
I'm done with this, peace out.👋