1: NATURE'S GIFT

"Nature does nothing in vain."

--SIR THOMAS BROWN, Religio Medici. Pt. xi, sec. 19. 1680. Quoted as "the only undisputed axiom in philosophy."

Milk and mother provoke almost synonymous images of home and goodness. Both conjure up the warm, fuzzy feeling of being cared for and protected. How often the universal mother of us all has reminded us to "drink all your milk" so we will grow strong and healthy. Then, there is the color of milk which reminds us of purity and cleanliness. It's no wonder that most of us look on milk as the perfect food.

Arguments on the goodness of human milk for infants as opposed to cow's milk have long raged. Now comes medical research with an even more damning verdict--one which rocks our deepest beliefs when it tells us mother didn't always know best. Milk causes more diseases than it prevents, the scientists now tell us. The blame lies as much with nature's gift as with our distortion of environment. The quality of our environment determines the quality of our food whether it is meat, wheat, water or milk. Milk, because of its physical and chemical properties, is most susceptible. It mirrors and magnifies what we put into our environment or, as a saying goes, what goes around comes around.

Even before man messed up this pious-looking liquid, it was never a good bargain. Milk, with its proteins, fats, carbohydrate and vitamins, did provide nutrition but at a cost, as we will prove in this book, totally unacceptable to mankind. Now with so many added features like pesticides, radioactive elements and heavy metals of all kind, it is even a poorer bargain than it ever was. Yet the strong milk lobby has successfully promoted the idea of naturalness of milk and the American public has come to equate natural with goodness in its selection of foods. The modern myth that things natural are naturally good requires further investigation. Man survived the challenges of evolution by protecting himself from the raw offerings of nature and not by adopting them. Wind, lightning, floods and other calamities of nature are not easily embraced. Nor are the poison ivy and strychnine, both natural to man. Why, then, such commotion over milk? Just because it is natural? Natural to whom, cow or man?

A fundamental principle of physics states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So, everything around us, in whatever form, is natural. Man has only transformed or molded things around him to best suit his needs. Through millions of years of evolution man has learned that all things natural are not necessarily good for him. Take for example the cow's milk. Cow's milk is natural only for calves and not humans. Man's insistence on drinking milk from another species has cost him dearly. Man is the only mammal that dies of heart disease almost naturally.

On the other hand, who are we to interfere in the eternal process of evolution. Man's adoption of cow's milk may just be the type of cardinal error Nature awaits its living creatures to make to turn the course of evolution. The health hazards of milk may be Nature's way of challenging the survival of the fittest principle as it applies to a child born today. Historically, calamities, droughts, famine and plagues have helped contain population growth, just like the cow's milk is doing today.

However, we do not need to fall prey to this self-defeating prophecy? Man needs to re-evaluate his priorities and reject what is apparently natural but harmful, such as cow's milk.

Yet, attacking this sacred cow is difficult. Morning, noon and night the call resounds throughout America: "Finish your milk." And with each glass of milk shoved down Jane's or Johnny's throat, comes the increased chance of their developing atherosclerosis, cancer, autoimmune diseases, infections and a host of other diseases still unidentified, when they reach adulthood. Despite the evidence building against milk, it is all but impossible to convince the American mother to stop forcing it on her children. In many ways, milk has become an emotional and psychologic outlet for mothers, who are elated knowing their offspring has received proper nutrition for the day by "finishing that glass of milk." Two words sum up why this psychology has developed: economic windfall. One of the largest businesses worldwide is raising cows, milking cows and finally milking the consumer, by selling a product which has limited nutritional value but unlimited potential to cause damage to health.

There are, however, ways to modify milk to remove what creates its undesirable effects. According to Dr. David L. Freed, a renowned expert on milk, we can start by removing lactose and proteins to reduce the incidence of allergies and intolerance; floating fat to reduce the incidence of heart disease; xanthine oxidase to reduce heart disease and allergies; and hormones, drugs, pesticides, carcinogens, toxins, etc., to reduce the risk of cancer and chemical allergies. Once all of this is accomplished, we can drink milk safely, but most people would complain that the resulting crystal clear, water-like liquid does not taste as good as it is supposed to.

In 1983, under the chairmanship of Dr. Freed, gathered experts on milk at the University of Manchester to discuss whether humans should drink cow's milk. Their conclusion that cow's milk is not for humans was startling to many who had long believed that the cow is man's second best friend.

The findings of this symposium, like those of thousands of other medical reports on the health hazards of milk, however, did not catch public attention. There were no Time Magazine cover stories, no New York Times editorials or even quips in the National Enquirer. Why? Why didn't the world respond to these important findings like it has to the issues of cigarette smoking, artificial sweeteners, abortion and AIDS. The answer is found in our disbelief that milk can be hazardous to health. A belief which finds its roots in our cultural and religious teachings strengthened by the jingles of the dairy industry formulated at the Madison Avenue. Understanding why milk is bad is in the best interest of all of us. We need to learn, not only the medical findings, but also the economic, social, psychologic, religious, ethnic, emotional, mystical and political aspects of milk as food if are to ever change our milk-drinking habits. And that is what this book is all about. Attacking the Sacred Cows provides knowledge to those who think they know how milk affects human health; to mothers who insist that their children drink milk every day; to prospective mothers faced with the decision on breast-feeding and to all those "altruistic gurus" of the dairy industry who preach the goodness of dairy products for the benefit of mankind.