Hacker News Reader

Comment by sedachv | Hacker News Reader

> milk… is something that everyone pretty much still uses today worldwide

I don't understand where people come up with this nonsense. Do you just generalize your experience to everyone else? 68% of the world population is lactose intolerant: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28690131/

View on HN

You might be surprised, but being lactose intolerant doesn't mean you don't consume milk. Lactose-free milk exists, tablets that allow you to consume lactose exist, and most importantly, even lactose intolerant people can usually eat a small amount without suffering ill effects. So someone who can't drink a glass of milk usually can eat some pastry made with milk. So just because 68% of humanity is lactose intolerant doesn't mean 68% of humanity doesn't consume milk in some form.

Why do you think the genetic mutation for lactose tolerance is so geographically specific to Northern Europe? It is obviously an adaptation for when milk was the only available source of nutrition to those populations during times of famine. And the selection pressure for this is not ancient history - my grandparents experienced exactly that scenario due to food shortages during WWII. I don't know why you would advocate de-lactosed milk, lactase supplements, or "sneaking a little bit in" for the vast majority of people who are lactose intolerant, unless you had some agenda of pushing dairy on people who do not particularly want it and have no cultural traditions of consuming it. There is no reason for lactose tolerant people to eat dairy on a regular basis because it contributes to heart disease. Advocating it for those who are lactose intolerant is just insane.

>>I don't know why you would advocate de-lactosed milk, lactase supplements, or "sneaking a little bit in"

Are you definitely replying to the correct comment? I'm not advocating anything. I'm purely stating a fact that just because 68% of humanity is lactose intolerant doesn't mean 68% of humanity does not consume milk. I just said lactose free milk exists(because it does), lactose-digestion enzyme pills exist(because they do) and people with lactose intolerance can usually eat a little without suffering any bad effects(because most people can). Is stating facts propaganda now?

>> unless you had some agenda of pushing dairy

Yes you're absolutely right, my check from big milk industry will surely arrive any day now. You looked right through me.

You don't need paid sponsorships to push your colonialist attitudes on other people.

Stating simple facts that anyone can google in 5 seconds is colonialist? Are you for real?

Or maybe....you're the one with some kind of agenda here? Because I can't believe anyone would read into my comments as hard as you do. Or I don't know, do you take those simple facts as some kind of personal attack?

The lactose intolerant people I knew all do drink de-lactozed milk or non-cow milk. They also eat it with cereals. Practically, somewhat lactose intolerant people eat food with milk inside (whether in sauce or cheese) and avoid only quantities that cause them troubles.

There is really no reason to get offended over that reality. I don't really know why those people consume milk and I was never rude enough to ask. It is their diet. But, they in fact eat it even in situations where they don't have to and go out of their way to get sorts of milk they can consume.

> I don't really know why those people consume milk and I was never rude enough to ask.

Can you take any guesses as to why? Do you think it might have anything to do with the colonialist attitude of "of course, everybody drinks milk!" displayed in the parent comment? Are your acquaintances in the US? Do you think it has anything to do with the $500 million spent over 20 years on "Got Milk?" propaganda?

"colonialist attitude of "of course, everybody drinks milk!" displayed in the parent comment? "

You know that simply wanting something to be true doesn't make it so, right?

Here* is a link to a quantitative assessment of milk consumption around the world.

There is even a handy map.

Interestingly, they note that milk consumption is higher amongst older people. Possibly due to the crazy amount of milk propaganda historically.

I know this isn't directly related to your comment, but it was getting heated so I wanted to derail that.

* https://milkgenomics.org/article/milk-consumption-around-the...

Lacking enzymes to digest lactose doesn't prevent dairy consumption, as fermenting milk removes lactose. Many cultures have long ago figured this out, even before lactase persistence existed in humans.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/how-can-you-eat-dair...

>In modern Mongolia, for example, traditional herders get more than a third of their calories from dairy products. They milk seven kinds of mammals, yielding diverse cheeses, yogurts, and other fermented milk products, including alcohol made from mare’s milk. “If you can milk it, they do in Mongolia,” Warinner says. And yet 95% of those people are lactose intolerant.

>Modern Mongolians digest dairy by using bacteria to digest lactose for them, turning milk into yogurt and cheese, along with a rich suite of dairy products unknown in the Western diet. Ancient pastoralists may have adopted similar strategies. “Control and manipulation of microbes is core to this whole transformation,” Warinner says. “There’s an intense control of microbes inside and outside their bodies that enables them to have a dairying culture.”

>That disconnect between dairy and DNA isn’t limited to Mongolia. Jessica Hendy, a co-author of the PNAS paper, recently found milk proteins on pots at Çatalhöyük in Turkey, which at 9000 years old dates to the beginnings of domestication, 4 millennia before lactase persistence appears. “There seem to be milk proteins popping up all over the place, and the wonderful cultural evolution we expected to see isn’t happening,” Collins says.

This might be uncommon, but my brother is lactose intolerant and still eats the milk products he wants, he simply doesn't mind the diarrhea that follows.

I don't understand where people come up with this nonsense. All diary products gradually lose lactose as they are processed more and more, so for example 24 month old Gruyere doesn't contain any of it (less than 0.1g for 100g even for standard ones). You can be hardcore intolerant and still enjoy this fine Swiss product or any other from hundreds French ones, British etc. without any issue, in any amount.

Plus all the rest others written.

Even fresh mozzarella has very little lactose in it, something like 1 g per 100 grams. Any cheese made from curd basically, because the sugar mostly stays in the whey.

(I am lactose intolerant, and I realize the level of discomfort that people experience varies)

This article states that 68% is the global prevalence estimate of lactose malabsorption.

"Lactose malabsorption (lactase non-persistence) is not equivalent or synonymous to lactose intolerance. Lactose malabsorption in many cases will not come to clinical attention."[1]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4040760/

That doesn't say anything about consumption rates. We don't even know how many of those 68% even know whether or not they are intolerant. My wife is from Thailand where lactose intolerance is statistically very high and yet milk consumption appears to be widespread. They even have milk-based products that are not seen in the West, for example milk-based sodas and soft drinks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com