Anti-Milk Critics Hurting Young Girls' Health

When I first learned in 1978 that I was lactose intolerant, I had never heard of the condition before and neither had anyone else I talked to.

Today the reverse is true. Everybody's heard of lactose intolerance, so many people attribute every intestinal gurgle to LI even if they don't lack lactase.

Even young girls have begun to believe that they are LI when they are not. Because of this, they tend to avoid dairy. That means that they take in less calcium daily and this is already showing up as lower bone mineral content.

This is the report of a new study, Perceived Milk Intolerance Is Related to Bone Mineral Content in 10- to 13-Year-Old Female Adolescents by Leann Matlik, Dennis Savaiano, George McCabe, Marta VanLoan, Carolyn L. Blue, and Carol J. Boushey in the journal Pediatrics Vol. 120 No. 3 September 2007, pp. e669-e677 (doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1240).

From the abstract:

RESULTS. Of the 230 girls who completed breath hydrogen testing, 65 were Asian, 76 were Hispanic, and 89 were non-Hispanic white. A total of 100 girls experienced increases in breath hydrogen levels of >20 ppm and were classified as lactose maldigesters. Of the 246 participants who completed useable perceived milk intolerance questionnaires, 47 considered themselves to be milk intolerant. Of the 47 girls self-reporting perceived milk intolerance, 40 completed breath hydrogen testing and 22 were not maldigesters. Girls with perceived milk intolerance consumed an average of 212 mg of total food calcium per day less than girls without perceived milk intolerance. Spinal bone mineral content was significantly lower in the girls with perceived milk intolerance, compared with the girls without perceived milk intolerance. When girls with lactose maldigestion were compared with girls without lactose maldigestion, there were no significant differences in calcium intake or bone measures.

CONCLUSIONS. These results suggest that, starting as early as 10 years of age, self-imposed restriction of dairy foods because of perceived milk intolerance is associated with lower spinal bone mineral content values. The long-term influence of these behaviors may contribute to later risk for osteoporosis.

Study leader Boushey was interviewed by Anne Harding for a Reuters article.

The fact that girls who considered themselves lactose intolerant were consuming less calcium at such a young age could put them at risk of osteoporosis later on, Boushey noted. It's not clear, she added, where this perception is coming from, but she and her colleagues are investigating whether parents' perception of their own lactose intolerance has anything to do with how their children feel about dairy products.

"I don't think that this comes from the girls, they're way too young, it has to come from something around them," she said.

I think I know where it comes from. The anti-milk nuts who spread their vile philosophy that milk is poison rather than a terrific source of concentrated nutrients wrapped in a good-tasting and versatile package.

You're doing damage to children by spreading this message rather then giving people a balanced assessment of the pros and cons of milk. I beg you to stop and reconsider. I understand that milk is not a necessity for the daily calcium requirements, but by putting the stress on the evils of milk rather than the choice of using or not using milk as part of an overall healthy diet you've managed to make the dialog more poisonous than milk could ever be. When your hateful words start affecting long-term health of young girls, it's time to dial back and change your message.

Let's work together to get the message as healthy as we want young bodies to be.