3-year-olds consuming alternative milks were 1.5 cm shorter on average
cbc.ca
cbc.ca
This study is looking at "children aged two to six" (ages at which formula or breast milk would no longer be necessary to sustain life), and the article highlights that non-dairy milks' nutritional content is different from dairy milk, which may have developmental consequences. One possibility is that non-dairy milk meant to consumption by small children should be fortified more (or differently), or that vegan diets for children commonly require more supplementation. I think there's evidence that fortification of dairy milk has had great health benefits, while apparently for particular purposes non-dairy milks are starting out at a disadvantage even if they have some health benefits in other ways.
In the course of my first decade of veganism, I developed significant D and B₁₂ deficiencies which I've recently successfully cured with dietary supplements. I don't think that vegan advocates will do ourselves or our cause any favors by pretending that these deficiencies are rare or difficult to acquire; in fact, they're relatively common and often associated with a vegan diet. (I'm thinking of all the effort that John Robbins spent pointing out that adults can easily get adequate proteins and amino acids from vegetable sources, because this is something people reflexively call into doubt. From what I've heard since, I think he was right on that point, but the same can't be said for B₁₂!) The good news is that these deficiencies also easy to detect and, for many people, they're also easy to cure.
When we're talking about childhood nutrition, the stakes are higher, and it's essential to be better informed and more attentive. A few years of deficiency in these vitamins in my 30s has probably not hurt me for the long run, but it might be a different story if the same thing had happened when I was three or four.
It's almost like alternative milks have around 30 calories per cup and real milk has 160 calories. That's a huge difference because you're likely to give your child "a glass of milk", not ask them to drink 5 glasses because the alt milk has basically no nutritional value.
Source: my gf swears by alt milks so I have a fridge full of them. I borrow them sometimes when I run out of real milk.
PS: Yes I'm comparing to "full" fat 3.5% milk. Not that watered down stuff that seems to be super popular for some reason. And while I'd love to use real full fat milk, 3.5% is the most I have easy access to in the absence of owning a cow.
I think you can choose a nutrition profile quite a bit closer to dairy milk in many respects if you specifically want to, but it's going to depend on how your particular product was processed, sweetened, and fortified.
Cows milk also has quite a lot more protein than most alternative milks.
You could add cream to your milk.
But almond or soy instead of cow's milk? That's nuts.
[hah pun not intended]
The farmers owned 2 or 3 machines where the cow goes when it wants to give milk, and get out whenever it feels about it.
There's a video on their website where you can see it http://www.lafermeduramier.fr
The cows can go outside whenever they want and sleep on some kind of mattress.
I think they're having quite a cool life
You get a bunch of calves. Half of those are female, and go to replace the older dairy herd, which are killed. The other half are male, and there's no use for male dairy calves, and so they're all killed while quite young.
The selective breeding of dairy cattle has caused some genetic problems with modern cows.
All of this applies to the free range end of dairy farming.
This is in constrast with chicken eggs, which I believe can be ethically produced (even though they aren't in the large majority of the industry).
It's possible to do a lot better than we do when slaughtering; but even with the best methods there's going to be up to a second of bewilderment if not pain and terror.
Im not 100% convinced of the necessity of drinking milk or that height is particularly a good proxy for health as a metric.
But vegans should be under no illusions that almond milk or soy milk is any kind of milk substitute. And if they're giving it to infants instead of breastfeeding or formula, it's borderline neglect.
I think that there a valid uses for them - soy milk is good for lower calorie lattes for example, and almond milk is delicious in oatmeal. But as a source of nutrition for growing children, they're pretty poor.
When it comes to feeding infants, sure, but my usage of soy milk as an adult is definitely as a substitute for milk. I use it in virtually all the places cow's milk is typically used: in my cereal, coffee, mixed with chocolate syrup, in most recipes that call for milk.... No need to get so up in arms about call things like soy milk a "milk" drink/substitute. In the vast majority of cases, it functions exactly the same.
Heck, Wiktionary even cites 14th and 15th century uses of the term "almond milk". [1]
Not to mention "milk of magnesia", which isn't even a foodstuff.
Just because you personally have not heard the non-dairy sense used until recently does not mean it is incorrect or should be "illegal" as the GP suggests.
Nothing borderline about it. Babies still die of malnutrition in developed countries, when it happens it is often from vegan diets.
I don't think that various vegetable derived products having "milk" in their names is the biggest part of the problem though.
I agree that it's clearly a life-threatening risk to give babies vegetable milk as a substitute for breastfeeding or formula.
The number of deaths from malnutrition in developed countries is also very low. The cases that don't have an underlying biological cause are going to come down to parental behavior and beliefs.
?? That's not what the article is about. They are talking about older children and comparing to cow milk, not formula.
Does their study indicate all milks in "other" independently showed similar difference in height of 1.5cm? Or are they saying the average for all other was -1.5cm in which case maybe kids on almond milk were -2cm and breast milk +1cm? And goat's milk some third number? My strong hunch is it is the latter in which case the 1.5cm is completely meaningless.
Here is another clue, the one example they give of nutritional differences cites soy milk's low protein while failing to mention that goat's milk has more protein than cow's milk.
Didn't read the original research but either the research is bad and possibly biased or this is very misleading reporting.
[edit] removed mention of breast milk since article didn't say that
Perplexing.
[edit: link to HN discussion on the lactose tolerant mutation] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4710596
I do not think it has been conclusively proven that taller statures are desirable. I would think adequate nutrient intake from a variety of food sources that leads to a sufficient and healthy height would be better than attempting to maximize for greater height at the expense of health in later years.
Not conclusively proven but there have been studies done that suggest taller people earn more money [0].
Taller people are also generally considered more attractive.
So there are at least 2 factors where taller people have an advantage in life.
0: http://www.businessinsider.com/tall-people-are-richer-and-su...
That said, no girl I've ever met has ever said, "wow, I really prefer to date short men". Perhaps some of them have said, "he's too tall", but most of them prefer tall men.
Most men that I know tend to prefer women shorter than them. And yes, some of them have said, "she's too short".
So, while more height in men may be inversely correlated to health, it is certainly desired among the multi-ethnic multi-economic cross-section of people with whom the topic of height has come up in conversation.
>IGF-1 promotes undesirable growth too—like cancer growth and accelerated aging. IGF-1 is one of the most powerful promoters of cancer growth ever discovered for cancers of the breast, prostate, lung, and colon.6 Overstimulation of growth by IGF-1 leads to premature aging too—and reducing IGF-1 levels is “anti-aging.”7
Wait for the meta-study, especially if the result is at all topical or exciting.
Who knows what kind of hormones the Diary Industry puts on the Cow-Milk you are drinking.
Cow=> Not your mother, not your Milk!
Furthermore Canada has milk production quotas so, depending how they're set, hormones might not be necessary to max production at all.
Canadian diary industry is very different from the US, so it's not obvious that you'd find hormones in the milk (there are per cow milk production quotas). Certainly not in the quantities found in US milk.
But here's wiki
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_farming_in_Canada
(The national post had a great series of articles about it. The Canadian newspaper sided with Trump against Canada's diary industry.)
Btw, Milk costs double in Canada than in the states. Tastes better though (well sour cream and yoghurt do. I hate milk). On the other hand cheese is much better in the states cause I can afford the European stuff here (100% import tarriff???) and there is more diversity in aisles.
As to the hormone part of my OP, no claim, at least no strong claim, was made. I just pointed out that, if your production is restricted, it doesn't make sense to pump your cows full of hormones.
I'm 6'3 and still get that to some degree. I like being this tall, but I think 6'1 or 6'2 are probably around the ideal height to reap the benefits of being tall, without being too affected by the drawbacks.
[1] http://www.truthaboutit.net/2012/05/true-or-false-half-of-al...
edit: bad math not 2.5 billion, still 25 million is not bad, I take it in exchange of 1 foot 7in.