Spoiled milk

I've always gotten the impression that if you don't drink enough milk, you will die.\nWhen I was growing up, drinking milk was just as important as staying in school. Not drinking enough milk was worse than selling yourself into prostitution or smoking crack-cocaine.\nMilk was ambrosia. It made you immortal. If you didn't consume the recommended three 8 oz. glasses per day, you were doomed to develop osteoporosis by the age of 12. And you would be short.\nImagine my surprise when www.cnn.com reported that milk might not be all that it's cracked up to be.\nSome studies show that milk might actually remove calcium from the bones to digest its high protein content. Research from a Harvard Nurses' Health study from 1997 found that women who consumed a large amount of dairy had higher rates of bone fractures than women who had very little. Several studies concluded exercise is more important to developing bone strength than increasing calcium. \nDairy also accounts for 25 percent of the fat intake in the diets of American children who have an increasing rate of obesity.\nBut for years, we've been haunted by one eternal question: Got milk? Those who don't "got milk" were thought to be screwed. But could the nutritional advice of celebrities with fake mustaches be wrong?\nThe beverage that goes well with cookies stirs up a lot of controversy. There are Web sites such as www.milksucks.com, where the drink is described as a "deadly poison."\nIf milk is so shady, how did it get such a fabulous reputation? Most of milk's publicity comes directly or indirectly from people who sell milk.\nThe National Dairy Council calls itself "the leader in dairy nutrition research, education and communication," providing nutrition information to the media, physicians, dieticians, educators and consumers. But the National Dairy Council is a sector of Dairy Management Inc, which is a marketing company that works for America's Dairy Farmers. Milk hysteria can't be avoided when the scientists are holding hands with the dairy farmers and frolicking through green cow pastures.\nScientific research is not free from bias, especially when it is funded by companies who stand to profit from any positive information learned about their products. Even doctors, teachers and credited news sources can get their information from research with an ulterior motive. A lot of health information available is designed to make money. The burden of finding the truth about nutrition lies with the consumer, and sometimes, the majority of information available has potential corporate bias.\nWe turn to science for the truth, not hype. We expect commercials to glorify goods and services, but people who wear goggles and play with laboratory rats are supposed to be our allies. Often the lab rats were bank rolled by a company trying to snag more customers. \nIs there a milk mafia scheming my demise for drawing attention to potentially biased research? Only tomorrow will tell. But the lesson is to be skeptical of health information no matter where it comes from. \nIf a new scientific study says that consuming 32 oz. of mayonnaise per day is essential in preventing influenza, definitely check it out. But be wary if the study was funded by the American Association of Mayo Manufacturers.\nThough respected nutrition expert Mr. T has endorsed milk, I pity the fool who relies solely on milk for calcium intake. Just like with fad diets, there are no miracles in nutrition. Question what you hear about anything touting health benefits.