|
|
#11
10-24-2007, 12:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Milk
http://www.newstarget.com/021784.html
[ QUOTE ] A variety of genetically modified corn that was approved for human consumption in 2006 caused signs of liver and kidney toxicity as well as hormonal changes in rats in a study performed by researchers from the independent Committee for Independent Research and Genetic Engineering at the University of Caen in France. [/ QUOTE ] http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opin...sold-in-us.html [ QUOTE ] Non-approved GM maize sold in US * 02 April 2005 * * Magazine issue 2493 IN YET another blunder by the biotech industry, it has emerged that a non-approved variety of genetically modified maize was sold in the US for four years. The corn poses no health risk, but the incident is sparking renewed accusations that the regulations and methods for controlling GM crops are faulty. "This really makes us wonder what else is in corn that has not been approved," says Jane Rissler of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington DC. "It seems that companies either won't or can't control it." [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#12
10-24-2007, 12:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Milk
[ QUOTE ]
gmo corn I don't know all the details but I've heard the high fructose corn syrup is from gmo, pretty sure gmo corn is in human food. [/ QUOTE ] Oh yeah, you're right, I'm way off. I guess GM started in feed but is now in everything. "The Grocery Manufacturers of America estimate that 75 percent of all processed foods in the U.S. contain a GM ingredient" From what I can tell US law has basically no provisions against novel foods; something has to be proven to be unsafe, rather than proven to be safe. [ QUOTE ] as far as heated milk, I think it has more to do with denaturing the milk and it's hormones/proteins rather than dead bacteria. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I've read this and obviously heating does damage a lot of compounds, but there's no evidence of a significant health difference. Of course those things are hard to really prove.
|
|
#13
10-24-2007, 12:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Milk
[ QUOTE ]
Gaining weight --> go for the gallon. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] milk is great. [/ QUOTE ] Everytime someone posts on here about soy products, there is a a rash of posts saying "argh, it's evil. It's full of phytoestrogens which act like estogen in men and turn you into a girl". But, milk is basically swimming with real actual bona fide estrogen. Which, I presume, is more estrogenic than isoflavones or other phytoestrogens, no? So, if Soy products are bad because they act like estrogen, how come milk isn't like the most evil thing ever? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
|
#14
10-24-2007, 01:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Milk
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] non-pasteurization is worse. [/ QUOTE ] kind of a straw man argument here. past vs. dirty raw milk. basically if you can't get clean raw milk then don't drink it from what I know. [/ QUOTE ] You're right. I'd much rather get campylobacter, escherichia, listeria, salmonella, yersinia, and brucella from my milk instead of just protein/carbs/fat.
|
|
#15
10-24-2007, 03:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Milk
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Gaining weight --> go for the gallon. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] milk is great. [/ QUOTE ] Everytime someone posts on here about soy products, there is a a rash of posts saying "argh, it's evil. It's full of phytoestrogens which act like estogen in men and turn you into a girl". But, milk is basically swimming with real actual bona fide estrogen. Which, I presume, is more estrogenic than isoflavones or other phytoestrogens, no? So, if Soy products are bad because they act like estrogen, how come milk isn't like the most evil thing ever? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I would really like to know more about this, but can't find any really convincing evidence either way. How about for someone who isn't super serious, will this estrogen stuff matter when all i'm trying to do is get to fairly modest goals (rep 200 with bench, 250-300 squat and dead)?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
