Why Coca-Cola wants to sell the world expensive “science milk”
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
My cynical guess is that they took out all the lactose, then replaced 70% of it with table sugar or HFCS. The irony there would be that, while the carton can still say 30% less sugar, they removed all of the sugar that acts nothing like fructose in humans (many people can't digest it, and those who can do so about as fast as they do protein) and replaced it with a bunch of fructose that was never there in the first place.
http://fairlife.com/our-products/fat-free/
So apparently they don't add HFCS. I guess they don't try to remove more because the sugar makes it taste better.
Most of the modern "fad" diets are against dairy. Personally, I'm torn. I'm half-convinced that it's "unnatural" for human consumption, but at the same time it's a cheap, tasty way of getting good fats and protein.
Its not like a large portion of the Earth's human population has evolved the ability to process lactose after childhood or anything--
I can't speak for the specific case, but on a general guideline, the great majority of people can reap huge benefits simply by doing sports and dropping junk/processed food. In this perspective, choosing one food [group] over another, is nothing else than bikeshedding (in other words, the bottleneck is somewhere else).
1) Health nuts. As another poster mentions, many of the fad diets that have swept the country over the past 30-odd years have taken an anti-dairy stance. Milk loses. (Ancillary: breakfast cereal has been taking a big, big hit among health-conscious consumers, and as breakfast cereal goes, so too does the milk that goes with it.)
2) Crunchies. These people have various reasons (health, the environment, etc.), but regardless, they're against processed foods, industrial farms, GMOs, non-organic anything, and so forth. As the various horrors of factory farms have come to light, these people have turned away from milk.
3) Convenience drinkers. Water and soft drinks have edged out milk as a "snack" choice. They keep better, travel better, and to many people, taste better.
4) Kids. Kids have pretty much never liked milk, despite parents' best attempts to force it on them. This is because milk, as a standalone beverage, is revolting. As parents begin to question the purported health benefits of milk, they stop subjecting their children to it.
5) Trend takers. Not health-conscious eaters per se, but rather, the kinds of eaters who just know they can't touch gluten, despite never having been tested for celiac disease. These people take their cues from the health nuts and the crunchies. If you're looking at a food trend from a Crossing the Chasm perspective, the health nuts are the early adopters, and these folks are the followers. They don't set trends, but they'll never pass up the chance to hop on a new bandwagon. CNN said something about dairy, or paleo, or gluten, or whatever, and these people are now religiously opposed to those things. It's half identity politics, and half inchoate desire to make healthier lifestyle choices. In either case, it's half hearted.
6) Ron Burgundy. It's too damned hot. Milk was a bad choice.
That is a patently false claim.
For profit? Companies would sell heroin to kids if they could get away with it.
verdict, tastes like milk, bit of malty aftertaste, typically offensive marketing
edit: if you never did, go on a farm and try, you'll see, it's very different
So amping up the protein (casein) content makes the milk more addictive? :)
Got Milk? Does a body good. And other bullshit to help you decided.
I always find it odd when people consider drinking milk to be unnatural, somehow -- as though it's any more unnatural than the other 99% of our modern diet.
My cat would disagree with that.
> I always find it odd when people consider drinking milk to be unnatural, somehow -- as though it's any more unnatural than the other 99% of our modern diet.
Well, the fact that most non-Northern European adults are lactose intolerant is a better basis for concluding that drinking milk is, for most people, "unnatural" than is available for most other foodstuffs.
The statistics about lactose intolerance are a complete jumble of inconsistent data; I'm very skeptical.
I can't speak for many groups/countries, but for the one I've been in extensive contact with, the published numbers are simply out of whack.
If that's true then what the hell are peacocks doing?
Pretty neat stuff seeing how evolution affects all of us.
"We" in this case being, essentially, Northern Europeans. Lactase persistence isn't really the global norm.
That being said, yes it's not a global norm.
For those of us with the ability digest it, a moderate amount of dairy is probably a good thing.
http://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-the-milk-revolution-1...
Protein content is arguably insufficient. For people in need (real or imaginary), the amount is too little per portion - for the rest of the masses, a balanced diet will give enough proteins (especially considering the average meat intake in western countries).
Reasoned approaches to balanced nutrition look elsewhere for "slashing calories".
It has more calories than a 500 ml coffee with cream and sugar, and much more than a black coffee or a double-black/green tea (0 calories).
Honestly milk's health effects are highly exaggerated. I don't love this article[0] and won't stand behind everything in it, however it begins to get the point across that the adverts for milk are just that: adverts.
Edit. Also full cream or why bother.
They add enzymes to convert the lactose into other sugars.
So I guess they are still comparing to less processed milk.
Maybe there is a market for a shared cow startup?
iMoo: a modern alternative for an old staple. The cow with the 'share' function. Kickstart a cow?
Or, just use your head for thinking before stuffing it with the next branded product. Buy unbranded fresh staple foods and prepare them yourself. Don't whine about your busy schedule which does not allow you to do this, see it as a challenge instead of a chore. You'll spend less money and end up healthier to boot. Invite some friends (real live ones) if you're single and don't like eating alone. If there isn't an app for that yet, maybe there should be: geo-located single hungry people who want to share their chow.
Your comment is all about asserting that unprocessed food is good for you. Where's the evidence?
>If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!