Follow Your Heart Vegan Gourmet™ Cheese Alternative

My Product Clearinghouse attempts to list and give addresses for every single national and most regional milk alternative products available in the United States. It's a big job, and it's unique. That's somewhat redundant. Nobody else would be dumb enough to try to compile something this big and keep it updated.

And while I try to doublecheck everything, some mistakes do slip through. I have to rely on readers and viewers to catch me if I don't get it right.

So a thank you, an apology, and a plug for Bob Goldberg of Follow Your Heart/Earth Island, makers of Vegan Gourmet™ Cheese Alternative for letting me know that I got the URL of his website wrong. It's already corrected on my Cheeses page, and here it is again: www.followyourheart.com.

If you go to that site, you:

can visit our Online Store, where you can purchase Vegenaise, our eggless, dairy-free mayonnaise, (Original, Grapeseed Oil, Expeller Pressed or Organic), Vegan Gourmet™ Cheese Alternative (Mozzarella, Nacho, Monterey Jack, and Cheddar), as well as our Chicken Free Chicken™ vegetarian meat substitute.

What's more, Bob tells me that they'll soon be adding a vegan sour cream and cream cheese to their Vegan Gourmet line.

If there are any other corrections that need to be made on any product, send me an email at stevecarper@cs.com.

Lactose and Sugars

All lactose is sugar, but not all sugar is lactose. And that's just the start of the confusion.

When most people talk about "sugar" they're referring to sucrose, the sugar found in sugar cane and sugar beets, among other sources. Sucrose is so common that if you see just plain "sugar" in an ingredients list on a food package, it means sucrose and nothing else. Any other type of sugar has to be mentioned specifically by name, either chemical name or common name. Honey is a type of sugar, and so is high fructose corn syrup, and molasses, and a host of other sweeteners.

Lactose is a special case, because it's the one sugar that so many people have trouble digesting. Those of us who are lactose intolerant lack the enzyme called lactase which breaks the lactose down into the simpler sugars called glucose and galactose.

And that leads to an interesting question, answered by Robert L. Wolke, professor emeritus of chemistry at the University of Pittsburgh whose latest book is "What Einstein Told His Cook 2, the Sequel: Further Adventures in Kitchen Science" (W.W. Norton, 2005), in a column in the Washington Post online.

I am a public health nutritionist and often need to recommend dairy alternatives or lactose-reduced products for clients who do not digest lactose well.
Here is my question: Why are the sugar levels of milk, yogurt and lactose-free milk all the same? It seems like the yogurt should have lower levels due to the consumption of milk sugar by the culture bacteria. And lactose-free milk should certainly have lower levels because of whatever they do to take the lactose out. However, the labels of all three products read about the same in terms of sugar.

It's puzzling, but true.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, whole milk contains an average of 5.25 percent lactose by weight, while unflavored whole-milk yogurt contains 4.66 percent. Presumably, then, the culture bacteria have been allowed to consume only 0.59 percent of the milk's lactose before being forcibly restrained by cooling or killed by heat. By that time, the fermentation bacteria will have converted enough lactose into lactic acid to curdle the milk to the desired consistency.

The real head-scratcher, though, is lactose-free milk. If they've taken the lactose out of it, how come it still contains about 5 percent sugar -- the same as in whole milk?
The answer is that lactose-free milk is made not by removing the lactose but by adding the enzyme lactase. Just as sucrose is made of two simple sugars bound together, lactose is made of the two simple sugars glucose and galactose, bound together. The lactase enzyme splits the lactose into its two components, which are digestible by lactose- intolerant people.

But glucose and galactose are still sugars, and the FDA requires the aggregate amount of all sugars to be listed in the Nutrition Facts chart.

Good question, good answer, and a good rest of column as well. Take time to read it all.

Dairy Symptoms May Be Neither Intolerance Nor Allergy

Ah, science. It never stops changing, never stops learning. While you have to work to keep up with it, the glory of science is that it has something new to say every single day. (For the same reason, Intelligent Design aka Creationism will always be a fraud designed to keep you stupid – it can never say anything new: all it can do is say "no" to whatever stuff science comes up with.)

Anyway, remember Dr. Laura Paajanen, author of the dissertation I summarized in A Serious Look at Lactose Intolerance and The Different Types of Dairy Allergy?

You can take a look at a summary of another piece of her research at medpagetoday.com. The original article was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. (Paajanen L et al. Cow milk not responsible for most gastrointestinal immune-like syndromes-evidence from a population-based study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2005; 82:1327-1235.)

By giving laboratory and genetic tests to people who claimed to have symptoms when eating or drinking dairy products, Paajanen found that only a tiny minority of them tested positive for either lactose intolerance or milk allergy. What's the problem, then? Possibly something that we haven't recognized before and don't fully understand:

"We conclude that food-related gastrointestinal symptoms in young adults are caused by unspecific and unknown traits of altered mucosal immune response rather than by cow milk, as is often suspected by the patient," the study authors wrote.

"We suggest that this new entity, i.e., intestinal immune-mediated disorder, may be a self-perpetuating disease with fluctuations in symptoms, they wrote. "An autoimmune characteristic of the syndrome, at least in a subgroup of the affected subjects, cannot be ruled out."

This "as-yet uncharacterized intestinal immune-mediated disorder" as Jeff Minerd, the medpagetoday writer, put it, could explain why so many of the people who write me complaining about milk have symptoms and effects that don't correspond to anything we know about intolerance or allergy.

Unfortunately, there's no advice yet about what to do if your suffer from this, or even how to test for it. But in science identifying a problem is always the crucial first step toward a solution. Keep tuned.

Yogurt One of World's Healthiest Foods

Health magazine named the five healthiest foods in the world in its current issue.

Yogurt was one of them. "Among yogurt's benefits: enhanced immunity, improved lactose intolerance, and stronger bones," the magazine said.

That's real yogurt, as made in Greece: the slightly sour natural variety, not the sugar-laden dessert that is usually found in American supermarkets. That still has some of the same health benefits, but the extra sugar can be a problem.

The other top four:

Spain: Olive Oil
Antioxidant-rich olive oil protects against heart disease.

Japan: Soy
Protein-packed soy is linked to the prevention of cancer and osteoporosis.

India: Lentils
Lentils give you protein, cholesterol-lowering soluble fiber, and lots of iron.

Korea: Kimchi
Loaded with key vitamins, kimchi contains healthy bacteria that aids digestion.

Lactose in Beer?

I'm often asked about lactose in the oddest places. And then when I do the research it turns out the places aren't so odd.

Take beer. Once upon a time brewers used to make "milk stout," by adding whey (the lactose-containing portion of milk) to the barley. The yeast used in beer doesn't ferment the lactose (unlike some of the beasties that live in your colon) so instead of sour lactic acid, you keep a sugary taste. Milk stout was a milder form of beer and also thought to be more nutritious than the regular ales, so good that it was given to nursing mothers to fortify them.

Some people say that you can't call a beer milk stout in the United States these days, but the beers are still being made - using pure lactose rather than whey - both here and in other countries. A list of American milk stouts and other types of sweet stouts can be found at the Beer Advocate site.

Now the answer you've all been waiting for. How much lactose is left in the beer? You won't be surprised to learn that it varies too much with the recipe for a definitive answer. I did a calculation from one recipe and found that it resulted in about half as much lactose as a glass of milk. Other sources say, however, that the lactose content is small for some milk stouts. If you drink for flavor and not a buzz the lactose shouldn't be a problem.

Indian Alternatives to Milk

An article in the online Hindustan Times, Dislike cow's milk? Try alternatives, gives a great summary of the varieties of non-dairy products available in India.

In addition to commercial products, such as Oatly oat milk, the article also lists various milk alternatives that people can make for themselves including their own oat milk, rice milk, Kokkoh (a rice milk of Thai origin), almond milk, and lupin milk.

One warning: the article also lists goat milk as an alternative. As I've written before (see Goat's Milk for Lactose Intolerants? No.), goat's milk has the same lactose content as cow's milk. It's the different protein composition that allows some people with dairy allergies to drink it.

Gluten-Free Store Opens

It took years for vegetarian cafés to appear in more than a couple of cities. Vegan stores are even rarer. Allergy-free shops? Almost invisible.

So it's news that an all-gluten-free store is not only operating but thriving in Clawson, MI, in the suburban Detroit region.

The Bel Cibo Marketplace was opened by Al Doyle, who nearly died before his celiac disease was diagnosed around seven years ago.

His deli, cafe and grocery

sells only gluten-free foods, from packaged breakfast cereal, soy sauce and salad dressing to glazed doughnuts, chicken potpies, salads and side dishes, and fresh-baked pizzas.

Yes, the pizzas are available with cheese and in dairy-free style with a soy substitute. So is the lasagna. Doyle is a former restaurant chef.

Most people with celiac disease do wind up lactose intolerant, because the disease damages the part of the intestine where the lactase enzyme is made.

We can only hope for the success of this store. The better it works, the more likely it'll be that others copy it and start stores and delis of their own all over the country.

Vitamite Might Not Be Around Any Longer

I've had several people ask me where their Vitamite went.

Vitamite 100 was a non-dairy milk substitute distributed by Diehl Specialties, not to be confused with various vitamin supplements that also used the Vitamite name.

The Vitamite 100 web site is no longer functioning.

I'm taking the product off of my web site unless and until I hear that it's still officially available.

The sad truth probably is that small niche products like this have an extremely difficult time competing for shelf space and simply don't create enough sales to keep them going.

You can check for other similar products on my Nondairy Milk Substitutes page in my Product Clearinghouse.

A Serious Look at Lactose Intolerance

The dissertation, MILK HYPERSENSITIVITY
Effects of Cow’s Milk and its Processing on Gastrointestinal
Symptoms and Delayed-Type Immune Responses, by Laura Paajanen, that I just wrote about in The Different Types of Dairy Allergy also has some good technical information on lactose intolerance (also called hypolactasia in some of the medical literature.

Paajanen writes:

In lactase deficiency the activity or concentration of the lactose cleaving enzyme β-galactosidase, also called lactase, in the brush border of the small intestinal mucosa is insufficient. This hypolactasia causes insufficient digestion of lactose, the major carbohydrate of milk, a phenomenon called lactose malabsorption or lactose maldigestion. As reviewed by Sahi (1994), lactose maldigestion affects approximately 60% of the world’s adult population, the prevalence varying in Europe from 2% in Scandinavia to 70% in Italy, 70-90% in South America, Africa and Asia, and reaching 100% in some Asian countries.

The forms of lactose maldigestion are 1) lactase non-persistence, 2) secondary lactose maldigestion, and 3) rare congenital lactase deficiency. In lactase non-persistence, also called adult type lactose maldigestion, lactase activity is high at birth, decreases in a genetically programmed way in childhood and adolescence, and remains low in adulthood, which is the normal physiological situation for humans and other mammals. In populations where lactase non-persistence is predominant, the loss of lactase begins soon after weaning, and vice versa – in populations with low prevalence of lactose maldigestion, it develops later in adolescence or even in early adulthood (Sahi et al. 1983, Sahi 1994). Lactase is found at the tip of the intestinal villi, and is therefore vulnerable to intestinal diseases, inflammation and chemotherapy, leading to a secondary form of lactose maldigestion. Typically, lactase activity returns after recovery from the original disease (e.g. celiac disease, Crohn’s disease, enteritis) and after the discontinuation of chemotherapy (Bode & Gudmand-Hoyer 1988, Murphy et al. 2002, Österlund et al. 2004b). A small intestinal resection may cause irreversible secondary lactose maldigestion. Congenital lactase deficiency is an extremely rare inheritable genetic defect, which is apparent immediately after birth (Savilahti et al. 1983).

Hypolactasia accompanied by clinical symptoms such as bloating, flatulence, nausea, diarrhoea, and abdominal pain is called lactose intolerance. The symptoms occur when undigested lactose passes to the large intestine, where it serves as a fermentable substrate for the microbiota and osmotically increases the flow of water into the lumen. The intensity of the symptoms depends on the amount of lactose ingested, on individual sensitivity, the rate of gastric emptying, gastrointestinal transit time, and the pattern of microbiota in the large intestine. Ingestion of 50 g lactose, the amount commonly used in clinical tolerance tests, causes symptoms in 80-100% of lactose maldigesters, whereas the ingestion of a glass of milk (200-250 ml) causes symptoms to only 30- 50% (Vesa et al. 2000). For some unknown reason, a small percentage of maldigesters remain symptom-free even after the ingestion of large amounts of lactose. Symptoms of lactose intolerance can be reduced by food and meal pattern choices and by the consumption of low-lactose and lactose-free dairy products. Total avoidance of dairy products often results in poor calcium intake and an increased risk of fractures; so lactose intolerance is associated with reduced bone mineral density and may predispose to bone fractures (Jackson & Savaiano 2001, Kudlacek et al. 2002, Obermayer-Pietsch et al. 2004). Self-described "lactose-intolerant" individuals may restrict their dairy and calcium intake without real clinical need, and are at risk of osteoporosis and bone fractures (Savaiano 2003).

Lactose digestion can be measured by direct or indirect methods (Arola 1994). The direct methods – the measurement of mucosal disaccharidases, and an intestinal perfusion technique for the exact measurement of lactose digestion – are laborious. The most widely-used indirect tests are the traditional lactose tolerance test (measurement of serum glucose), the lactose tolerance test with ethanol (measurement of serum galactose), the hydrogen breath test and the urinary galactose test. Genotyping for the C/C-13910 variant of lactase persistence/nonpersistence is a new way of determining susceptibility to adult-type hypolactasia; however, it cannot be used as a diagnostic tool to determine lactose intolerance, as the age of reduction of lactase varies (Enattah et al. 2002, Kuokkanen et al. 2003, Rasinperä et al. 2004).

(One important point: the lactose intolerance test with ethanol is not used in the United States.)

Technical, to be sure, but a strong grounding in the technical side will help you to sort out sense from nonsense when reading articles in newspapers, magazines, or online that often are so simplified by people who dion't understand the subject that they can lead to confusion.

The Different Types of Dairy Allergy

Allergy. Hypersensitivity. Which one affects you or your family? How do you distinguish between them?

I took a stab at answering this in a simple way on my web site with Lactose Intolerance versus Milk Allergy.

I know that some of you want a deeper insight on the way the body works. Fortunately, a recent dissertation has addressed this question in depth.

It's MILK HYPERSENSITIVITY
Effects of Cow’s Milk and its Processing on Gastrointestinal
Symptoms and Delayed-Type Immune Responses,by Laura Paajanen.

The dissertation is a huge (83-page) .pdf file, so those with slow connections should be warned that it might be a long download.

The background information on allergies and intolerances is more important for readers than the study itself, so that should cut down on a lot of reading.

One part that I particularly want to highlight is the section on types of allergies. There are four major types, although just two are ones you normally have to worry about, true allergies and hypersensitivities. Paajanen writes:

Allergic reactions are traditionally classified under four types of hypersensitivity reaction which may lead to tissue damage, as described by Coombs and Gell (see Britton 2002, Hay & Westwood 2002, Male 2002, Platts-Mills 2002). It is not clear whether all four types of reaction are involved in the pathogenesis of food allergy, either in the gut itself or in remote organs. More than one mechanism may be involved in any allergic reaction, but the most plausible mechanisms are IgE-mediated reactions (Type I), and the non-IgE-mediated activation of T lymphocytes (Type IV): allergies may be exclusively IgE-mediated, partially IgEmediated or exclusively cell-mediated (Sampson 2001).

Type I, immediate anaphylactic hypersensitivity is characterised by the production of IgE antibodies against foreign proteins (Platts-Mills 2002). IgE antibodies bind to high-affinity Fc_RI receptors on mast cells and basophils. When an allergen binds between two IgE antibodies, it induces degranulation of a mast cell/basophil, which leads to the rapid release of histamine and the more gradual release of other mediators such as leukotrienes and cytokines. The combined effect of these agents is to constrict smooth muscle, dilate capillaries and induce cell infiltration. This mechanism underlies the common problem of atopic allergy….

Type IV, delayed cell-mediated hypersensitivity reactions take more than 12 hours to develop (Britton 2002). T cells identify antigens, and the antigen-sensitised T cells produce cytokines and other soluble factors which mediate the hypersensitivity reaction, or else they develop cytotoxicity. Th cell-activated macrophages destroy intracellular bacteria by releasing inflammatory mediators. Activated cytotoxic T cells and natural killer cells destroy virus-infected cells and transformed human cells, i.e. cancer cells and tissue transplants. Tissue damage occurs as a result of persistent antigenic stimulation, either because of continuing infection or because of autoimmunisation. Type IV hypersensitivity has been classified under three varieties: contact hypersensitivity and tuberculin-type hypersensitivity, which both occur within 3 days of a challenge; and granulomatous hypersensitivity reactions, which develop over a period of 21-28 days and are clinically the most serious of the Type IV responses. More than one type of delayed hypersensitivity may follow a single antigenic challenge, and reactions may overlap.

One other section is also a must read.

3.1 Different types of cow’s milk allergy
CMA before school age

CMA is usually the first major food allergy, since cow’s milk rpoteins are the first source of foreign antigens massively ingested in infancy. In several large clinical trials, the cumulative prevalence of allergy to cow’s milk has been approximately 2-3% during the first years of life in the general population (Jakobsson & Lindberg 1979, Hide & Guyer 1983, Bock 1987, Høst & Halken 1990, Schrander et al. 1993, Saarinen et al. 1999). In atopic infants, however, the prevalence is up to 50% (Sampson & McCaskill 1985, Isolauri & Turjanmaa 1996, Niggemann et al. 1999). CMA has been reported even in exclusively breast-fed infants (Høst et al. 1988, Isolauri et al. 1999, Järvinen et al. 1999, Österlund et al. 2004a). The majority of paediatric patients have symptoms from two or more organ systems: approximately 50-60% have cutaneous, 50-60% gastrointestinal and 20-30% respiratory symptoms (Høst 2002). In exclusively breast-fed infants with CMA, severe atopic eczema is a predominant symptom. In infants under the age of one year, CMA is reportedly IgE-mediated in 57-64% of the cases (Vanto et al. 1999, Saarinen & Savilahti 2000). The overall prognosis of CMA in infancy is good, with a remission rate of 85 or 90% by 3 years of age (Høst & Halken 1990, Høst 2002), non-IgE-mediated reactions being the quickest to recover (Vanto et
al. 2004)….

CMA in school-aged children and adults

In most textbooks CMA is considered to be rare in adults. Only a restricted number of studies on the immunological mechanisms of adult CMA exist, supported by either double-blind, placebo controlled milk challenges or the open challenge procedure (Nørgaard & Bindslev-Jensen 1992, Nørgaard et al. 1995, Bengtsson et al. 1996b, Bengtsson et al. 1996a, Bengtsson et al. 1997, Werfel et al. 1997, Little et al. 1998, Ulanova et al. 2000, Lin et al. 2002, Magnusson et al. 2003). In recent years recovery from CMA has become a subject of controversy. Compared to the mainly IgE-mediated CMA of infants and small children, a new form of delayed-type gastrointestinal cow’s milk hypersensitivity, also known as cow’s milk sensitive enteropathy, has been described in school-aged children and adults, and it may be more common than previously thought (Bengtsson et al. 1996b, Bengtsson et al. 1996a, Bengtsson et al. 1997, Pelto et al. 1998, Pelto et al. 1999, Ulanova et al. 2000, Kokkonen et al. 2001a, Lin et al. 2002, Magnusson et al. 2003, Kokkonen et al. 2004). After childhood, reactions to milk are rarely IgE-mediated, and virtually only case reports of IgE-mediated CMA in adults exist. In one study, only 10% of the children with CMA in childhood had IgE-mediated reactions to milk protein at school age; however, half the children still reported gastrointestinal symptoms related to the ingestion of cow’s milk protein (Kokkonen et al. 2001a).

As for diagnosing allergies in infants and children:

In young infants, open controlled challenges have been shown to be reliable when performed under professional observation in a hospital (Høst & Halken 1990, Niggemann et al. 1994, Isolauri & Turjanmaa 1996). In children over 1-2 years of age and in adults, the double-blind placebo controlled food challenge is considered the gold standard for exclusion of psychological or causal reactions (Høst & Halken 1990, Niggemann et al. 1994), but is often too laborious in clinical work (Kaila et al. 2000). In patients with delayed reactions, a placebo-controlled food challenge would be the best method of diagnosis (Bindslev-Jensen et al. 2004), but this is often not practical in clinical work. In adults in particular it may be difficult to distinguish gastrointestinal allergies from other gastrointestinal symptoms such as those of lactose intolerance or irritable bowel syndrome.

In early infancy and especially in breast-fed infants who develop immediate reactions to cow’s milk, the presence of a specific elevation of IgE antibodies to cow’s milk or a skin prick test for cow’s milk may have diagnostic value. According to reports, the specificity of the skin prick test varies greatly, from 50 to 99%, and sensitivity, from 14 to 78%, when the cut-off size of the wheal diameter is set at 3 mm (Majamaa et al. 1999a, Vanto et al. 1999, Roehr et al. 2001, Saarinen et al. 2001, Strömberg 2002, Rancé 2004). In these particular studies, the atopy patch test was found to have better specificity (71 to 100%), especially in patients with skin symptoms, but its sensitivity for identifying all the disease cases was comparatively low (from 26 to 89%). When quantitatively assessed by the CAP System FEIA, cow’s milk specific IgE antibody titres of over 32 kU/l have been reported to predict IgE-mediated CMA with as high as 95% certainty in atopic patients (Sampson & Ho 1997). However, this finding was not supported by a recent study in which much higher cow’s milk-specific IgE titres (88.8 kU/l) were needed for predicting CMA with 90% probability, and the authors concluded that no meaningful predictive decision point could be calculated for predicting CMA (Celik-Bilgili et al. 2005). Skin tests are rarely useful in adults (Nørgaard & Bindslev-Jensen 1992). Increased IgA and IgG milk antibodies are not diagnostic, but merely a sign that milk has been ingested. Basophil histamine release is more frequently measured in other food allergies (Hansen et al. 2003, Østerballe et al. 2003) than in CMA (Prahl et al. 1988), and has not usually been found to be more predictive than skin prick testing or milk-specific IgE testing.

There's much more to read as well. It's a fine summary of the literature for anybody who wants more than the "allergy lite" you usually get online.

Holy Cow!

One of the silliest arguments against drinking milk is that it's somehow "unnatural," as if all the other forms of food that humans eat - and that's virtually every plant and animal in the world - are somehow designed for human consumption.

But humans have been using cows, along with all the other major domesticated milkable animals, as a food source for thousands of years.

Recently, archaeologists have found in Gohar Tepe, in the Mazandaran province in Iran, statues of cows that are at least 3000 years old, indicating that cows were being worshipped even then.


According to the Cultural Heritage News Agency, Ali Mahforouzi, head of the excavation team, said:

Some cow statues have been discovered in the archaeological excavations of Gohar Tepe, one of which is left almost intact. These sculptures which are in shape of rhytons were being used in religious ceremonies....

The statue in the picture is the only one found intact. It's about 12 inches long, 4 inches high, and 5 inches wide. It's technically known as a rhyton, which are usually used in religious places. This one shows artistic mastery.

Civilization came to this region some 5000 years ago. They understood the value of cows and their milk for those who could drink it. How have we fallen behind them?

I'm Back

Hope you didn't get worried about me because I didn't post for a while.

Nothing happened, but I did have to go out of town unexpectedly.

While I get my thoughts together for a big post, I'll put up some older stuff I had put away for a rainy day.

McDonald's Sued Over Fries Announcement

Oh, c'mon, you knew it was going to happen the second you saw the original announcement that McDonald's had hidden dairy and wheat derivatives in its fries.

And of course the lawsuits are now coming in from all over the country. The AP reports that suits have been filed in Illinois, Florida, and California.

However, only one of the lawsuits alleges that anyone got sick as a result of eating the fries, and that was a five-year-old with gluten intolerance. I have not seen any indication that anyone with a cow's milk protein allergy ever became ill.

It's early yet, though. No doubt some federal judge will put these into a class-action lawsuit somewhere down the line. At that time we'll find out a lot more info about what was in those fries and whether they ever held any danger for the milk allergic.

MTK, as they say in the news biz. More to come.

Wonder Bread Has Dairy? It Does! It Doesn't! It Will!

Whenever you think the world has gone beyond bonkers, someone in Corporate America will come along and kick it up another notch.

Take Wonder Bread. Good old-fashioned Wonder Bread, so ingrained in American lore that a spokesperson for the company issued a statement assuring folks that its new Wonder Bread with whole grains would still roll up into little balls for lunchroom food fights. Dairy-free Wonder Bread, which managed to build bodies 12 ways without using any milk for the last decade. That Wonder Bread.

The one that now complies with the new Food Labeling Law by listing a warning that it contains milk. But doesn't contain milk.

You read that right. There's a milk warning on a product that contains no milk.

Why? Because at some point in the future, Wonder Bread will change its recipe to include whey, a milk product. When? Oh, maybe later this year.

"Our customers are best served - and the spirit of the FDA regulations is best served - by changing the labeling on a schedule that ensures that consumers have the information they need," said Theresa Cogswell, vice president of research and development of parent company Interstate Bakeries Corp.

That's nice of them, and extremely civic minded.

Only one problem.

It's not currently true. They are deliberately mislabeling their product.

"The regulations state that the packaging has to be truthful and not misleading," [FDA spokeswoman Kimberly] Rawlings said. "The label should reflect the contents of the package."

So is this fraud? Probably not, but mostly because the FDA never even considered the possibility that somebody would start putting on a warning before the product was even added.

Wonder Bread. Teaching people not to trust ingredients labels since 2006.

Excuse me while I go off in a corner and babble quietly to myself.

We Hit the Quarter Million Mark

I started Steve Carper Lactose Intolerance Clearinghouse in the early days of the web, in 1997, as a way to continually update the information in my then newly published book Milk Is Not for Every Body: Living with Lactose Intolerance.

It started as no more than a few pages created in Word, before I had learned even basic HTML. I knew from the beginning, though, that I wanted to a way to get as much info from others and share it as widely as I could. That's why I named it a Clearinghouse.

Clearinghouse it's been. Dozens, if not hundreds of others have sent me info on every possible aspect of Lactose Intolerance. Today's the site's grown to over 100 pages, with information that literally can't be found anywhere else on the Net. My Product Clearinghouse lists every nationally available milk substitute product I'm aware of, along with dozens of items from countries around the world, countries which a few years ago had nothing for those who are LI. My Milk-Free Bookstore lists just about every book that might be of interest to those needing to avoid milk for any reason. I have answers to questions sent in by the thousands. And of course I have the basic information everyone needs about LI and dairy products.

I'm proud to say that my hit counter has finally gone over the magic 250,000 mark. That's probably conservative – I didn't have a counter at all in the early days – but it still means a lot. Thanks for all the support and praise you've sent me all these years.

I'm putting more time into this blog these days. It's just easier to update on a daily basis. That doesn't mean that the website is going to fall into dust. I'm still adding products, sites, books, and links to the site and I plan to continue doing so as long as there's a need.

Thanks again, everyone. I would have stopped long ago if it weren't for all of you. That's why I'm saying "We" Hit the Quarter Million Mark.

Steve Carper's Lactose Intolerance Clearinghouse.

P.S. If you forget the URL, just enter www.stevecarper.com. You'll be redirected to the site.

Gak's Dairy-Free Snacks

Jill Robbins is yet another mother who took her child's allergen-free diet into her own hands. Eight years ago, after her youngest son was both with serious food allergies, she began to explore recipes that were actually edible.

This has grown into Gak's Snacks.

Jill wrote me to say:

Gak’s Snacks is a new web-based company whose mission is to make it easier for children and families with food allergies to enjoy baked goods like everyone else. We offer cookies and coffee cake, baked in our dedicated facility with no peanuts, tree nuts, eggs, wheat, or dairy. Our products are also whole grain, certified organic, and contain no cholesterol or trans fat. For those who enjoy baking, we have just published a food allergy cookbook for baked treats and we offer many of the ingredients in our web store. As a Mom of a child with multiple food allergies, I know how important it is to find resources.

Contact info:

Gak’s Snacks, LLC
P.O. Box 491
Windham, NH 03087-0491
Phone: 603-425-6613
Toll free: 800-552-7172
info@gakssnacks.com

Dairy Derivatives in McDonald's Fries

McDonald's has always claimed that it had no dairy in its fries. Good.

McDonald's has decided to disclose the presence of common allergens in its foods in response to the new labeling laws even though it doesn't legally have to. Good.

Oops. It turns out that they've slapped a milk label on those dairy-free fries. Bad.

Here's the story as it is being reported by the Associated Press.

McDonald’s director of global nutrition, Cathy Kapica, said its potato suppliers remove all wheat and dairy proteins, such as gluten, which can cause allergic reactions. But the flavoring agent in the cooking oil is a derivative of wheat and dairy ingredients, and the company decided to note their presence because of the FDA’s stipulation that potential allergens be disclosed.

“We knew there were always wheat and dairy derivatives in there, but they were not the protein component,” she said. “Technically there are no allergens in there. What this is an example of is science evolving” and McDonald’s responding as more is learned, she said.

I can't find any mention of what exact derivative of milk is used in the fries, although I'll update this report as soon as it's revealed – if ever. However, even if the flavoring agent is lactose, the amount that enters a particular batch of fries is probably way too small to create symptoms in any but the most extremely susceptible lactose intolerant individual.

For those with milk allergies, the situation is a bit more complicated. No protein component should mean that they are safe for most people with a mild allergy. Those with serious anaphylactic-potential allergies know that even a few molecules of remaining protein can trigger an attack, so they should now avoid these fries entirely.

The same holds true for those with celiac disease and other gluten intolerances.

Three cheers for the new Food Labeling Law for forcing these disclosures. More information on the law, along with a link to the bill on the FDA site, can be found at Major Change In Labeling Law Scheduled for January 1.

Blackwell's Organic Gelato

Marcia Blackwell of Blackwell's Organic, makers of vegan soy gelato and fruit sorbetto, dropped me a note about her company.

She writes:

We got in the business because my husband is lactose intolerant and I was concerned about the quality of our milk supply.

We use only the highest quality certified organic ingredients.

Their website is at http://www.blackwellsorganic.com

I found 11 flavors there: Blueberry, Chocolate, Coffee, Lemon, Mango, Orange, Peanut Butter, Peanut Butter Chocolate Swirl, Pineapple, Raspberry, and Vanilla.

Blackwell's is available in a few places in New Jersey and will soon be shipping its gelato by mail order.

Contact info:
Blackwell's Organic, LLC
9 Catherine St. Unit D
Red Bank, NJ 07701
732-229-8899 phone
732-876-0358 fax

More Great Good Dairy-Free Desserts Naturally

Fran Costigan, author of Great Good Desserts Naturally, has a sequel out called, naturally, More Great Good Dairy-Free Desserts Naturally.

Both can be found on my Milk-Free Books page in my Milk-Free Bookstore, along with links to over 200 other books for those wanting to avoid milk.

Calcium Is Not Lactose

I just received yet another question asking whether a calcium ingredient on a food label contained lactose.

The simple answer is no. No calcium additive in any food contains any lactose.

I can only assume that the confusion comes from the fact that milk is high in calcium. Some people must think that, therefore, calcium comes from milk, and so calcium must contain lactose.

Not true. Commercial calcium is rarely derived from milk. And no calcium product, not even calcium lactate, will have any lactose at all.

Just to be on the safe side, let me mention that calcium caseinate does indeed derive from the milk protein casein. And it is something that people with serious milk allergies must avoid. However, it contains no lactose. Two different problems; two different things to watch out for.

More on lactose in calcium products on my website on the page The Experts Speak.

Valio Moves Lactose Free Milk Across Europe and into Asia

Valio Ltd. has marketed a lactose free milk in Finland, it's home country, since 2001. It's a milk unlike most lactose free milks in the United States. Those have a sweet taste, because they use the lactase enzyme to break down the lactose into simpler sugars that are much sweeter than lactose. Valio uses a chromatographic separation process that physically removes the lactose. Lactose itself is so mildly sweet that removing it makes less of a difference. The process works so well that less than 0.01% of the lactose is left, allowing the milk to be considered lactose free.

Valio has since introduced its milk to lactose intolerant customers in Belgium (Valio brand), Sweden (Valio), Switzerland (Emmi) and Spain (Kaiku sin lactosa) in Europe and has now moved into the potentially huge Asian market with its Maeil brand milk in South Korea. Check out this chart of countries, brands, and types of milk. ESL (extended shelf life) means shelf stable brick packs; UHT (ultra high temperature pasteurization) means longer shelf life fresh milk.

Valio is also the parent company of Finlandia Cheese which sells lactose-free cheeses in the U.S.

Contact info for Valio in Finland is:
Valio Ltd, Head Office
Meijeritie 6, PO Box 10
00039 VALIO, Helsinki
Finland


Tel. +358 1038 1121
Fax +358 9 562 5068


You can also use their web site to send a message directly from their contact us page.

Vaalia Introduces Lactose Free Yoghurt in Australia

Vaalia, a Parlamat brand, has added lactose free yoghurt in Australia to its Zymil line of lactose free milk. Both use the lactase enzyme to break down the lactose into simpler sugars.

According to their press release, "the new offering comes in 2x175g packs in four flavours - French Vanilla, Creamy Lemon, Apricot Mango and Strawberry." It's a low-fat yogurt with 1.4% milkfat content.

Free e-book: ‘Grocery Shopping For Your Food-Allergic Child’

Plumtree Press has announced the publication of a free downloadable e-book, “Grocery Shopping For Your Food-Allergic Child.” The book is written by food allergy expert Linda Coss.

You can download it from www.FoodAllergyBooks.com/shopping.html.

Accordig to its press release, the book teaches parents:

• How to determine if a product is safe for their child;
  
  
• Why they should always read the ingredient statement of each item they purchase;
  
  
• What they need to know about the dangers of cross-contamination;
  
  
• How and when to call the product’s manufacturer;
  
  
• How kosher labeling can be helpful for the dairy-allergic
  
  
• And other important information they need to keep their food-allergic child safe.

Coss is the author of two books on food allergy: How To Manage Your Child’s Life-Threatening Food Allergies: Practical Tips For Everyday Life and What’s to Eat? The Milk-Free, Egg-Free, Nut-Free Food Allergy Cookbook. Both books are available at www.FoodAllergyBooks.com, Amazon.com, and various booksellers nationwide.

Trans Fat in Lactose-Free Margarines

The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act that went into effect on January 1 does more than just require the prominent labeling of allergens in the ingredients list.

(See Major Change in Labeling Law Scheduled for January 1.)

Another change is the requirement that the amount of trans fats be listed along with the amount of saturated fats. Trans fats are now thought to be the worst type of fats in foods, as this FDA QandA reveals:

Q: What ARE trans fatty acids?
A: Trans fatty acids (or “trans fat”) are fats found in foods such as vegetable shortening, some margarines, crackers, candies, baked goods, cookies, snack foods, fried foods, salad dressings, and many processed foods.

Q: Why Should I Care About Trans fat?
A: It’s important to know about trans fat because there is a direct, proven relationship between diets high in trans fat content and LDL (“bad”) cholesterol levels and, therefore, an increased risk of coronary heart disease – a leading cause of death in the US.

Q: Aren’t ALL Fats Bad?
A: No. There are “good” fats and “bad” ones, just like there’s good and bad blood cholesterol. Saturated fats and trans fat have bad effects on cholesterol levels. Polyunsaturated fats and monounsaturated fats (such as olive oil, canola oil, soybean oil, and corn oil) have good effects.

Q: How much trans fat is too much?
A: There is research currently underway to determine this. However, it is true and accurate to say that the less saturated fat, trans fat and cholesterol consumed the better. Trans fat while pervasive in many of the foods we eat is not “essential” to any healthy diet.

Trans fats are a special problem in foods made almost entirely of fats, like margarines. In my Product Clearinghouse I have a page listing Nondairy Margarines. All of them are lactose-free and I believe that all of them are casein-free as well. The usual disclaimer: Ingredients change without warning. Always check the package to be sure.

What's the trans fat contents of these margarines? A good question that was fortuitously answered in the January/February 2006 issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter, the publication of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

I've tried to match their data to the brands and varieties listed on my site. Remember, the lower the Bad Fat the better. Here's the results:

Total Fat – ToF; Saturated Fat – SF; Trans Fat – TrF; Saturated + Trans Fat=Bad Fat – BF; all are measured in grams

Benecol

• 55% Vegetable Oil (tub) ToF – 8; SF – 1; TrF – 0; BF – 1
  
• Light – 37% Vegetable Oil (tub) ToF – 5; SF – 0.5; TrF – 0; BF – 0.5
  

Canoleo

• 100% Canola Margarine (tub) ToF – 11; SF – 2; TrF – 2; BF – 4

Earth Balance

• Natural Buttery Spread (tub) ToF – 11; SF – 3.5; TrF – 0; BF – 3.5
  
• Soy Garden Natural Buttery Spread (tub) ToF – 11; SF – 3.5; TrF – 0; BF – 3.5
  
• Natural Buttery Sticks ToF – 11; SF – 4.5; TrF – 0; BF – 4.5
  

Fleischmann's

• Sweet Unsalted Margarine (tub) ToF – 8; SF – 1.5; TrF – 0; BF – 1.5
  
• Sweet Unsalted Margarine (stick) ToF – 11; SF – 2; TrF – n/a; BF – n/a
  
• Light Margarine (tub) ToF – 5; SF – 0; TrF – 0; BF – 0
  
• Light Margarine (stick) ToF – 5; SF – 1; TrF – n/a; BF – n/a
  

Mother's – not listed

Smart

• Smart Balance Light Buttery Spread (tub) ToF – 5; SF – 1.5; TrF – 0; BF – 1.5
  
• Smart Beat Super Light Margarine (tub) ToF – 2; SF – 0; TrF – 0; BF – 0
  
• Smart Squeeze Fat-Free Margarine ToF – 0; SF – 0; TrF – 0; BF – 0
  

Spectrum

• Natural Spread (tub) ToF – 10; SF – 0.5; TrF – 0; BF – 0.5
  
• Natural Spread Essential Omerga-3 (tub) ToF – 10; SF – 1; TrF – 0; BF – 1
  
• Organic (tub) – not listed

Willow Run

• Soybean Margarine (tub) ToF – 11; SF – 2; TrF – 0; BF – 2

The Healthletter rates any margarine with Bad Fat of 1 or less a Best Bite. Those with 1.5 rate Honorable Mention.

Dairy-Free Valentine's Chocolate

The people at Chocolate Decadence never fail to send me reminders about upcoming holidays and all the specialty chocolates they have available.

With Valentine's Day coming up fast, you should know that even last minute orders made on February 12 will be shipped to be received on time. I expect you pay for that privilege, of course. Order sooner for cheaper.

All their chocolates are:
"Dairy-Free ~ Lactose Free ~ Casein Free ~ Gluten Free ~ Vegan"

Specialty valentine's hearts and much more can be found at:
www.chocolatedecadence.com/product.htm#valentines

Here's the contact info:
Chocolate Decadence
1050-D Bethel Drive
Eugene, OR 97402
Tel: (541) 607-9073 or (800) 324-5018
FAX: (541) 607-6373
www.chocolatedecadence.com/

Reduced Lactose Milk Hits the U.K.

I can't believe it hasn't happened before this - and please correct me if I'm wrong - but lactose intolerant consumers had no equivalent to the reduced-lactose milk pioneered by Lactaid (and copied by many others) here in the U.S. and in Canada.

But Arla Foods has announced Lactofree, which it calls "a UK first."

Lactofree is produced by:

putting semi-skimmed cows milk through a filtration process and adding a lactase enzyme to ensure 99.95% of the lactose is removed.

Lactofree is already in stores, including Sainsbury's and possibly Tesco.

Medicine and Alternative Medicine

In my last post I mentioned the No-Milk List. We're having a dust-up now as people argue about their anti-milk beliefs in particular and their larger view of the worlds of medicine and alternative medicine in general.

I just put up there a post so long that I had to split it into two parts. I'm repreating it here to get it all up in one place, and also before I think it's generally applicable to anyone who has an interest in this blog.

-----

People here are correct when they say that anecdotal information can't be applied generally to a group of people. I'd go even farther: Most of the time it can't properly be applied to the person with the anecdote. The reason is simple. Change.

Any scientific or medical study depends on changing as few variables as possible. The more things that change, the harder it is to separate out what difference any one change is making. When we take dairy out of our diets, we think we're making just one change, but the truth is that we making all sorts of changes simultaneously. We eat different foods, we substitute for dairy in familiar foods, we alter the amount of food and the ratio of nutrients, lots of changes we seldom stop to think about.

Remember, though, I've always advocated that if it works for you and doesn't cause any damage, fine. Go with it. I have no objection to those who want to remove dairy from their diets. I've spent over 20 years supplying people with all the possible information they might need if they make this decision for themselves.

At the same time I've always warned people that getting tested is always a good idea. You never know where your symptoms are coming from: and the symptoms you're likely to get from either lactose intolerance or dairy allergy can have a thousand causes, some of them quite serious. Just assuming that you have a food allergy can mask another unrelated illness. Trying to determine if a particular food is causing your problems can be a nightmare.

That's what makes medical studies on foods so incredibly difficult. People could be brought into a clinical setting where every particle of food is monitored – but that hardly compares with the realities of everyday life. Much more often, people just keep food diaries and try to make as few other changes as possible. Even so, food studies are expensive, hard to run, and harder to evaluate. Worse, you can't do a double blind study for food. You know if you're taking dairy out of your diet or not, and that will affect the results.

This explains why medical studies about food, nutrients, or medications so often come out with big announcements that seem to vanish or be contradicted by the next study. Most of these studies are of tiny groups for short periods of time, often using protocols that just don't have much relationship to the real world. Even so, they're real studies that get printed in real medical journals and reporters look at the conclusions and write articles that make headlines. That's why I always say that you should never get your medical news from a newspaper. Or the internet, these days.

Most reporters – most people – have no idea of how to read a medical or scientific paper. This is one of the greatest failings of our school system. You can't just read the conclusions section and use that as guidance. You have to go through the entire methodology and procedure to see if the experiment as a whole works to give you real and new information. This isn't all that hard, and doesn't usually require any advance medical training. A few basic questions are all that's needed. Is the group studied random and representative? Is the group healthy or do they have medical problems? How large is the group? How many dropped out before the study was over and why? Is the study something that corresponds to real eating patterns or is it totally artificial? Are the results a true difference or just a slight tendency?

If you read closely, you'll soon notice that the studies that change the way medicine is practiced tend to be huge, long-term studies in which data from many papers are put together to make a larger and more comprehensive whole. This averages out or entirely deletes the exceptions, the poorly done studies, the natural variations in human physiology. Doing this takes medicine as far away from anecdotal information as it can safely get.

So if medicine tries to stay away from anecdotal information, who uses it? The answer is everybody else. All of alternative medicine is based on anecdotal information. All those people out there selling herbs and vitamins and enzymes and proteins and nutrients and nostrums. The ones selling raw milk or soy milk or rice milk or seaweed or spelt or sorghum. All the naturopaths and homeopaths and holistic practitioners. Every person whose religion gives them a special road to healing. They're all faith healers really, every last one, no matter whether a formal religion is mentioned or not. All of them absolutely depend on anecdotal information. They have to. Not one of them has ever done an actual study to back up their claims.

Let me repeat that. Not one of them has ever done an actual study to back up their claims.

Why should they? First, studies are difficult and expensive and time-consuming. Nor do they have the expertise to conduct a study. But most importantly, studies have one major obstacle to faith healing: they sometimes show that what you believe in is wrong. And the common element of all these alternative sites is that they're never wrong. They never allow people to come onto their pages and tell them that they cure is quackery, or that the money spent on their product was wasted, or that it had dangerous side effects, or that it prevented someone from getting medical help until it was too late. Instead, they give you anecdotes about how wonderful their product or their religion or their way of life is.

It may sound like I'm condemning all anecdotal information. Not at all. We use it all the time. If I need some work done on my car, I'll ask my friends for recommendations for mechanics. That's anecdotal information. Usually this works out fine. But there are no guarantees. Maybe all the mechanic's work was really done by a helper who just quit. Maybe my problems are completely different from those of my friends, more complicated, or on a foreign rather than a U.S. car.

It would really help if I knew something about how a car worked and it would be even better if there were a source of objective outside information about the procedures.

Most of us know a little something about cars, even if we can't fix them ourselves. If the mechanic were to tell me that the reason my engine won't start was that the gyroscopes in the tire weren't aligned with the phase of the moon, I'd laugh in the person's face. I sure wouldn't listen to anything else said about cars.

But people on this very list have posted information about the way our bodies work that is just as much moonshine. What's totally frightening is that people didn't laugh or stop listening. Why? Because just as nobody is taught how properly to evaluate a study, nobody is taught even basic knowledge about the way our bodies work.

Those of us with medical problems or conditions of any kind have an absolute need to learn as much as possible about human physiology. You don't have to become an anatomist, you don't need advanced medical training. You just need to know enough to understand when people are talking moonshine to you.

Where can you get this knowledge? Well, not from any of the alternative sites. They don't even want to know how you body works. How could they sell you magnetic bracelets or magic crystals if you knew anything about the body?

And you can't get it from pure anti-milk sites. That's like getting your information about the Democrats from the Republican National Committee website. You might think you were getting at least half the truth, but it doesn't work that way. All you get are the negatives. It's not just that the positives are never mentioned, but that the negatives are manipulated. The conclusions are quoted without any evaluation of studies as a whole. Comments are ripped out of context, and put together in creative new ways. Sometimes the remarks have no relationship to anything the original might have said. Instead of gaining information, you actually lose overall knowledge.

Medical studies have many faults. Many of them are just resume padding. Some of them are funded by firms who have a stake in the outcome. (Although who else is going to put up the money? I often wonder.) Most cannot be taken on their own but have to be evaluated as part of a much larger whole, and this is again, difficult and time-consuming.

But the alternative is no alternative. Even the people who most loudly decry the medical establishment are perfectly willing to quote them whenever a result is on their side. Because real medicine doesn't take sides. It publishes the positives and negatives, the cures and the dangers, the successes and the failures. Medicine changes with the times.

This upsets many people, I know. We all want certainty. But that's the basic difference between faith and medicine. The faith healers of all kinds and types and sorts will sell you certainty. They have a product, whether it's in a bottle or in a belief, and this product will help you, no ifs, ands, or buts. And this never changes. That's the guarantee that it's wrong.

Medicine is uncertain. It changes, updates, revises and contradicts itself. It's difficult and expensive and time-consuming. And it's the only thing we have. Accept no alternatives.

The No-Milk List

I belong to the No-Milk List, a listserv for people interesting in avoiding milk, fior whatever reason. For the most part, they aren't people with lactose intoilerance but sufferers of dairy allergies or parents of children with dairy and other allergies.

Messages can be posted to everyone on the list to ask for help or supply answers to others. Archived resources, on parve foods or nondairy recipes, for example, are also available at http://listserv.icors.org/archives/no-milk.html.

To subscribe, send an email to: LISTSERV@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
with these words in the body of the e-mail: SUB NO-MILK YourFirstName YourLastName

When you subscribe you will get all the instructions for the list so you can configure it to your own interests. However, I find it easier to receive each day's posting in a single e-mail. To do this, include SET NO-MILK DIGEST in your e-mail to the list. If you want individual e-mails use SET NO-MILK MAIL instead.

Note: This is a new e-mail address as of 2006.

FDA Announces New Prescription Drug Information Format

Those pages full of tiny type that come along with prescription medication will have to be revised to make them more understandable starting June 30, 2006.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced this week that pharmaceutical companies will have to make changes to the "package insert" that has all the legally required information about the drug for physicians, pharmacists, and consumers. It's the first revision in more than 25 years.

The major changes, according to the FDA's press release include:

A new section called Highlights to provide immediate access to the most important prescribing information about benefits and risks.

Table of Contents for easy reference to detailed safety and efficacy information.

The date of initial product approval, making it easier to determine how long a product has been on the market.

A toll-free number and Internet reporting information for suspected adverse events to encourage more widespread reporting of suspected side effects.

The press release also said:

The most notable change is the addition of a summary outlining the most important information about a product, prominently displayed at the top of the page. Designed to help healthcare professionals find the information they need quickly, Highlights will typically be half a page in length and will provide a concise summary of information about specific areas including: Boxed Warning, Indications and Usage, and Dosage and Administration; and will refer the healthcare professional to the appropriate section of the Full Prescribing Information. In addition, drug makers will be required to include a list of all substantive recent changes made within the year, to ensure healthcare professionals have immediate access to the most up-to-date information about the product before prescribing it.

The addition of a new Patient Counseling Information section places greater emphasis on the importance of communication between professionals and patients. This new section is designed to help doctors advise their patients about important uses and limitations of medications. It will also serve as a guide for discussions about the potential risks involved in taking a specific treatment and steps for managing those risks. If FDA has approved patient information for a prescription drug, it will be printed at the end of the label immediately following the Patient Counseling Information section or will accompany the label so it can be easily shared.

More detailed information about the changes can be found at: http://www.fda.gov/cder/regulatory/physLabel/default.htm

Unfortunately, for those of us looking for lactose on the label nothing will change. As far as I can determine, the list of inactive ingredients will not be part of the new Highlights section. You'll still have to search down into the fine print to the section called DESCRIPTION to see the fillers and additives.

Overall, the new format is being hailed as a great improvement in ease of understanding. Other aspects of the reform, especially those limiting patients' ability to sue in state courts, are being widely attacked by consumer groups, though. I'll be monitoring the status of the new rules over the next six months to see if this pressure results in any changes before the revisions go into effect.

Amanda's Own Dairy-Free Chocolate Confections

Beth Cherico of Amanda's Own Confections got in touch to let me know of her web site. Amanda is Beth's food allergic daughter, for whom Beth developed a line of dairy-free, nut-free and egg-free chocolates and dairy-free, nut-free and egg-free chocolate chips.

The site also says:

The chocolate is made on dedicated equipment that is free of all dairy and nut ingredients. We do not use dairy or nuts in any of our products so there is no chance for cross-contamination of our ingredients.

There are specialty pages for holiday chocolate gifts, recipes, and more on the site.

The web site is www.amandasown.com.

Here's the contact info:

Amanda's Own Confections
North Olmsted, Ohio 44070
Email: admin@amandasown.com
Phone: 440-570-6359

Good luck, Beth.

GOODBODY Lactose-Free Frozen Dessert

I'll be adding some new products to my Product Clearinghouse soon. And I'll be debuting them here.

One is GOODBODY, a frozen ice "cream" bar, available in two varieties, Refresh and Reward, and in a total of six different flavors. The GOODBODY Refresh bars are vanilla bars coated with sorbet in Raspberry, Strawberry and Tropical flavors. The GOODBODY Reward bars come in Chocolate Peanut Butter, Chocolate Banana and Double Dutch Chocolate.

I'm not sure what's in them, since they tell a lot about what's not. According to the press release the bars have:

no preservatives, no saturated fat, no trans fats, no artificial flavors, colors, or sweeteners, no high fructose corn syrup and no cholesterol. Most flavors are fat free, only 120 calories and have more fiber than a whole apple and more calcium than an 8 oz. glass of milk, yet they are also lactose free. GOODBODY also provides 100 percent of daily value of Vitamin C and generous levels of antioxidant vitamins A and E.

So look for GOODBODY bars. Or is that Goodbody bars, and the all caps is just an affectation of the press release? Some questions are beyond the power the blogging.

Lactose Intolerance FAQ and Links

About.com usually does a good job in compiling straightforward answers to questions.

Their Lactose Intolerance page has a long Q and A about LI, with short answers on the main page and links to longer articles, as well as to other sites with info on the subject.

The page supplements the more varied information on my site. Check out both if you can't easily find what you're looking for on one.

Nisin. The Milk Derivative You've Never Heard Of

The new food labeling law doesn't really change all that much, as most responsible companies have been warning consumers about the presence of milk and milk derivatives in their products for years.

Still, getting the cheaper and more recalcitrant companies to comply is a good thing.

And so are the spate of articles talking about the law and giving examples of foods that will trigger the mandatory labeling.

Here's one. "Label law puts food allergens in spotlight," by Sonja Isger in the Palm Beach Post.

The packaging on the cheese said it was "nondairy," that it contained no milk, that it was made with rice. But when Andy Weir bit into it, the toddler with an allergy to milk swelled in reaction.

What'd his mom miss on that label?

"Casein," Diana Weir said.

Casein. Caseinates. Curds. Ghee. Lactoferrin. Whey. Nisin. In food-ingredient lingo, they all mean "contains milk."

Wait a minute. Nisin?

Yep. Nisin (pronounced NYE-sin) is a protein antibiotic used for the last 40 or so years as a food preservative. From Answers.com.

Nisin is produced by fermentation using the bacterium Lactococcus lactis . Commercially it is obtained from natural substrates including milk and is not chemically synthesized. It is used in processed cheese production to extend shelf life by suppressing gram-positive spoilage and pathogenic bacteria. There are many other applications of this preservative in food and beverage production.

The problem with commercial nisin is that it's cut with milk. According to the Natural and Organic News column, produced by by Jane Andrews, the Corporate Nutritionist for the Wegmans supermarket chain:

If you think that all things natural are always safe to eat, then you're not thinking of people with food allergies. To anyone else, a natural preservative called Nisin that's now used in several sauces made in our Central Kitchen sounds innocent. Pronounced NYE-sin, it's a powdered additive that's about 24% milk solids because it's made from milk through bacterial fermentation. That's fine for most people, but if you have an allergy to milk protein or have lactose intolerance, you need to know it's there. (Posted 04-29-05)

Now you do. Help spread the word.

For further information on, or names of, products or ingredients derived from milk, look at the following pages on my website: The SuperGuide to Dairy Products or Dairy or Nondairy? The Experts Speak.

A2 Milk Claims Unproven

What is it with all the milk claims lately?

Australians and New Zealanders (New Zealandites?) beware. A new type of "milk anyone can drink" is sweeping your side of the world.

The culprit is A2 milk, which is milk that contains more of the A2 beta casein protein. The milk comes from cows that naturally produce more of this particular protein because of a tiny mutation in amino acid linkage.

The A2 Corporation's website is actually quite conservative in its claims about its product.

It says:

The potential advantages of A2 Milk™ were first identified through epidemiological studies which showed that in countries where the dairy herds produced a higher proportion of the A2 protein in their milk, there was a significantly lower incidence of childhood diabetes and coronary heart disease. Putting it another way, in countries where the milk contained more of the A1 variant of beta-casein there was a higher incidence of such diseases.

It was recognized that this statistical correlation was not, in itself, proof of a beneficial effect of the A2 beta casein in relation to disease, or of a causal connection between A1 beta-casein and such conditions, but the link appeared so strong that the findings have triggered further study and review.

The research is far from complete and is ongoing, but results to date suggest not only a statistical link but also a mechanism by which the consumption of A1 beta-casein or related subvariants may play a contributing part in the development or aggravation of certain diseases and conditions in some susceptible individuals.

Newspapers have no such compunctions. An article, " Experts in a froth over milk," by Louise Pemble in The Sunday Times of Australia, has naturally found someone who gives the milk magical properties:

But A2 milk has a dedicated following in Australia and New Zealand, with devotees arguing it can be enjoyed by allergy sufferers and that it reduces the symptoms of ADHD, autism and schizophrenia. …

Perth mother Shona Stubberfield has been having milk freighted from Brisbane for her son, who has been allergic to milk since birth.

She was sceptical of claims that A2 milk did not benefit those with a dairy intolerance.

Ms Stubberfield said that until she switched to A2 milk, she could not even breastfeed her son, Luke, without him vomiting.

"I tried all the medications for reflux, but after every feed he would throw up," she said.

"In three days, after eliminating all dairy from my diet, he stopped throwing up. He stopped screaming at night. He was a new baby."

Allergies to particular fractions of the casein family of protein are very common, true. That's the reason why goat's milk, whose casein composition is very different from that of cow's milk, is sometimes better tolerated by those who are allergic. In fact, goat's milk naturally contains more of the A2 beta casein. Without the further study that even the company admits is needed, however, there is no way to tell whether this tolerance will also be true for A2 cow's milk.

A good FAQ on A2 milk has been put out by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority.

Rumors are rife that A2 milk will soon be introduced into the United States and elsewhere outside of New Zealand and Australia, especially since A2 now has a new owner. Tread very cautiously if you try this, although those who already drink goat's milk for allergy reasons should have more success. Remember that the lactose content will be identical to regular cow's milk, so if you're lactose intolerant it's no different than any other type of liquid milk.

Modified Milk Ingredients

I recently received an email asking about what "modified milk ingredients" might mean when part of a food ingredients list.

It's not easy to stump me, but that succeeded. Fortunately a quick trip through Google gave me the info that it is a term specific to Canada and their Food and Drug Regulations (FDR).

According to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency:

"Modified milk ingredients are defined in item 7.1, subsection B.01.010 (3) of the FDR, as "any of the following in liquid, concentrated, dry, frozen or reconstituted form, namely, calcium reduced skim milk (obtained by the ion-exchange process), casein, caseinates, cultured milk products, milk serum proteins, ultrafiltered milk, whey, whey butter, whey cream and any other component of milk the chemical state of which has been altered from that in which it is found in milk".

That's about as all encompassing as you can get, so it anyone's guess what individual fraction of milk might be modified in a specific food. There's nothing like it down here in the States so I have no guidance as to what it usually might mean.

None of the proteins listed - casein, caseinate, milk serum proteins - would normally contain lactose, but the other forms would.

I'd treat any food with modified milk ingredients as a dairy product. Either use lactase pills or avoid.

Canada – it really is a separate country!

More Goat Milk Nonsense

Goats are becoming big business, so I suppose articles on the wonders of goat's milk will proliferate over the next few years.

And so will the misinformation they spew about goat's milk.

Take "Got Goat?" by Emily Young of the Salem News Online.

She's interviewing goat farmer Elizabeth Mulholland, who says, no, you won't believe me unless I quote it:

"From what I've read, goat milk has a different lactose makeup than cow milk. There are more molecules, smaller ones, that make it easier to digest. That's the theory," Mulholland said.

Aarrrggghhh! Smaller molecules? Who's teaching this idiocy?

And the article goes on to say, presumably getting its [mis]information from Mulholland:

Goat milk, like human milk, does not contain the major protein of cow milk to which many people, including babies, are allergic.

Wrong again. Goat's milk contains both casein and whey proteins, just like cow's milk (and mother's milk, for that matter). It just contains different and different amounts of the casein protein fractions (types) so that the allertgic potential is lessened.

Here's what someone with a brain in her head has to say. From the Comparing Milk: Human, Cow, Goat & Commercial Infant Formula site of Stephanie Clark, Ph.D, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Washington State University:

Distinguishing between allergies and lactose intolerance:

Allergies and lactose intolerance are different things. An allergic reaction is the body's response to a foreign body (antigen), typically proteins. Goat milk proteins have a slightly different amino acid structure than cow milk proteins. Thus, a person who produces antibodies to cow milk proteins, may not produce antibodies to goat milk proteins.

However, there is no guarantee that a person who is allergic to cow milk will not be allergic to goat milk, because the milks are similar.

Lactose intolerance results from a person's inability to digest lactose. Lactose is present in all milks. Thus, goat milk can not successfully be substituted for cow milk in cases of lactose intolerance.

See also my recent entry Goat's Milk for Lactose Intolerants? No.

Raw Milk Not for Lactose Intolerants

Raw milk is all over the news again, the latest round in this culture war, pardon the pun. Time to sort out fact from fiction.

Raw milk is just milk straight from the cow, with no processing. No homogenizing, no pasteurization, no added vitamins. These days it's also touted by the organic crowd if the cows have not been given the usual antibiotics to protect them from the plague of illnesses that farm cows are susceptible to.

For most of humanity's history, pretty much up until the 20th century, raw milk was the only kind of milk anybody knew. You lived with your animals or very close to them. You or your family or the nearby farmer milked the animal – cow, goat, sheep, camel, yak, whatever – and brought the bucket home. The cream rose to the top and was skimmed off to make butter or mixed in for a richer and fattier milk.

Even when cities developed, the animals were kept close by. In New England villages, for example, the commons – the grassy open area in the center of town – had cows grazing on them. Giant London was full of cows after it had grown to the largest city in the world.

This couldn't last. Cities eventually grew too big for everyone to get their milk from small herds. City dwellers objected to the smell and waste from cows in their midst. Farms moved outside cities and newfangled ways of transportation, like the milk train and later the refrigerated train car, allowed milk to be delivered fresh from the farm to an urban audience. Well, fairly fresh. The well-off got the best milk and the poor got milk from open containers that arrived looking like "dirty cheese."

After Louis Pasteur put forth his germ theory, doctors and scientists started realizing that warm raw milk was an excellent breeding ground for bacteria. Pasteurization – the heating of milk for a period long enough to kill the bacteria – became recommended for all milk.

The one problem with pasteurization is that heating milk changes its taste. The longer milk is cooked and the higher the temperature, the more the taste changes. Over a long period an optimal combination of the two was standardized. (Today, there is also ultra-high-temperature (UHT) pasteurization, which cooks the milk for a very high temperature but for a very short time. This allows milk to be shelf-stable, either giving it a much longer shelf life in the refrigerator case or go without refrigeration in the store entirely. Almost all lactase-reduced milk is UHT treated because its smaller volume of sales doesn't allow for the quick in-store turnover of regular milk. Some small regional firms may make "fresh pasteurized" lactase-reduced milk, but you would have to check locally for it.)

The raw milk forces did not go quietly. They advocated the creation of "model farms," in which careful and continual care of the cows and quick delivery to stores would eliminate the need for pasteurization and any changes in taste or any of the reduction of nutrient content that they claimed pasteurization imparted.

The model farms worked as models. They all failed in production for several reasons. First, the extra expense required for continual care drove up the costs of the milk so that the target audience – the poor who required milk for nutrition – couldn't afford it. Second, the larger the herd the more difficult and expensive continual care became. And third, no matter how careful they seemed to be, problems always crept in somewhere, either from diseases to the cows themselves or inadequately perfect handling before the milk got to the final drinker.

The mass market demanded mass milk. Controlled, cheap, standardized, guaranteed healthy milk in mass quantities. Pasteurization laws were passed in every state. Milk was homogenized so that the cream was evenly distributed throughout. Vitamins A and D, lacking or inadequate in cow's milk, were made mandatory as add-ons. Milk, "nature's perfect food," needed some tweaking to arrive that way at the kitchen table.

Cut to the present. Milk's reputation has taken numerous hits over the last few decades. Hormones and antibiotics given to cows to boost production and protect them against the diseases inherent in mass factory farms have been decried as tainting the milk itself. Whole milk's fat is accused for the obesity crisis in the nation's youth. Anti-meat forces want all milk taken off the menu.

Some of the milk forces have battled back by eliminating the changes that mass milk demanded. Some don't want homogenization. Some don't want pasteurization. Some don't add the hormones and antibiotics to the cow's feed. Some don't do any of these things.

Despite raw milk's checkered history, small farms have popped up all over the country to provide milk straight from the cow to the few who are willing to go out of their way to seek it out. Most states either prohibit the sale of raw milk or impose strict regulations on its sale, but it is generally available on farms or in natural foods stores in a multitude of places.

But there continue to be sporadic problems. In fact, the FDA just put out a warning after an E. coli outbreak in Washington:

Following an outbreak in the state of Washington, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning the public against drinking raw milk because it may contain harmful bacteria that can cause life-threatening illnesses. Raw milk is not treated or pasteurized to remove disease-causing bacteria.

The risk of drinking raw milk was most recently demonstrated in Washington State by an outbreak associated with raw milk containing the bacteria called Escherichia coli O157:H7 (E. coli). To date, eight illness have been reported in Washington state, several of which were in children. Two of the children remain hospitalized. Health authorities have identified locally sold raw milk as a source of the outbreak, and have ordered the unlicensed dairy to shut down.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 300 people in the United States became ill by drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk in 2001, and nearly 200 became ill from these products in 2002.

The Associated Press later ran a follow-up story in which the dairy denied that it's milk was the source of the contamination. However, that the dairy was unlicensed and illegal, and that three of its own employees got sick lessens any defense that they make. Salmonella bacteria were also recently found in raw milk from a dairy in Arizona. Other illnesses have been reported in Oregon and Pennsylvania.

To quote Ruth Kava, Director of Nutrition for the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH):

As part of the misguided alternative health movement, some have bought into the myth that raw milk is nutritionally and otherwise superior to milk that has been processed in any way.

Some parents also have "unwarranted fears," of genetically-engineered hormones given to cows to prolong lactation. Neither of these myths is true; but that hasn't stopped the proliferation of farms that will provide the unwary with supposedly beneficial raw milk.

The FDA says flatly that:

There is no meaningful difference in the nutritional value of pasteurized and unpasteurized milk.

The unfortunate truth is that raw milk may be a wonderful, better-tasting product if everything associated with it is done perfectly, but the risks associated with it are high. Why? Here's a quote from Dr. Bill Keene, who was a senior epidemiologist for the Oregon State Department of Health:

The risks involved with drinking raw milk are clear-cut for Keene: “When you milk a cow, fecal organisms always end up in the milk, along with skin tissue from the cow’s teat. If you test milk, it has bacteria in it. Even if you do a good job milking a cow there’s still bacteria present. This may be harmless bacteria for the most part, but from time to time it can make you really sick.”

The public debate regarding the health benefits and risks of drinking raw milk appears to come down to what a consumer decides to believe, Paulson said. “It’s a lot like a religion for some. They decide drinking raw milk is what’s best, and there’s not much the law can do to protect people from themselves.”

“Our job is to try to present the information,” Keene said. “And then we say, ‘Good luck, hope you get away with it.'"

My sentiments exactly.

So what does this have to do with lactose intolerance? After all, nobody would make the claim that raw milk should or could be for those with LI.

Unbelievably, this isn't the case. The Organic Pastures Dairy Company has the following sentence on its website as one of its "health boosting rewards" for raw milk:

Lactose intolerant consumers can eat raw milk because lactase producing bacteria are present.

Really? Then how do you explain the ten thousand years of symptoms from those non-mutants who drank raw milk in the past? Are there are chemical tests or double-blind medical studies on the site to back this up? Of course not. On the contrary, they tout tests showing their low bacteria count and give a lactose percentage of 4.23%, about normal. How they reconcile the two claims is beyond me. Yet, these claims are being repeated verbatim in articles by raw milk supporters.

Unless and until the notion that those of us with lactose intolerance can drink raw milk is proven scientifically, treat raw milk exactly as you would regular milk. You can have it in the same amounts, drink it with lactase pills, or leave it alone. Just don't trust in any magic claims.

Lactose Intolerance Doesn't Cause Strokes. Does It?

You'll notice in the About Me column off to the right that I had a mild stroke this year, forcing me to take several months off. No, the fact that I'm lactose intolerant had nothing to do with it. Nothing, nothing, nothing. I'm saying that very, very loudly because some of you out there would be writing in tomorrow telling me that their strokes really were caused by LI. No. They weren't. Nobody can possibly be that ignorant of LI, you say. That's only because you don't read my mail. You wouldn't believe what people already think that LI can cause. Oy.

Then again, "cause" is a loose term. To my stun and amaze, this very week I stumbled across an article by Howard Reich of the Chicago Tribune, reprinted in about a million smaller papers. It concerns the medical travails of Alexei Sultanov, a concert pianist with a long history of medical problems. And the stroke he had. In the thalamus, same as mine. "Caused" by lactose intolerance. Well, in a really, really, really loose sense of the word "cause." Let me excerpt just the few relevant sentences.

On a February evening in 2001, Sultanov walked into the bathroom in the Fort Worth home he shared with his wife, leaned over the toilet and purged his dinner.

A few minutes earlier, he had eaten a crock of French onion soup that he had cooked, promising himself he would not eat the cheese because he was lactose intolerant.

But he couldn't resist its aroma and taste. After he devoured the food, his stomach began to ache, causing waves of nausea.

He decided to do what he had done since childhood - retreat to the bathroom to empty himself of his meal. But while doing so he became dizzy, lost his balance and struck the left side of his head against the porcelain sink.

…

Cranial scans showed the disaster looming inside his head. So much blood was amassing, with nowhere to go, that it began pushing his brain from left to right.

As increasing amounts of blood pummeled the organ, blood vessels to his brain stem and other areas were severed or crushed, denying vital oxygen and glucose to vulnerable tissue.

Not one but five strokes racked Sultanov's brain as he lay in the hospital.

Well. Man. Not good. Though spoilsport me does need to point out that nausea isn't a symptom of LI. Whatever.

Bathroom safety. Our resolution for the New Year.

Major Change in Labeling Law Scheduled for January 1

The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA), passed back in 2004, finally goes into effect on January 1, 2006.

The full text of the bill, formally Title II of Public Law 108-282, can be found here.

The presence of any of eight potential major allergens - milk, egg, fish (e.g., bass, flounder, or cod), Crustacean shellfish (e.g., crab, lobster, or shrimp), tree nuts (e.g., almonds, pecans, or walnuts), wheat, peanuts, and soybeans – must now be revealed in plain English and in easy-to-see and –read form on labels.

What does mean for those with milk allergies, or who want to avoid milk for other reasons? I copied the following from about.com:

• List the allergen on the ingredient list. For example: MILK, listed with other ingredients.
  
  
• Use the word "Contains" followed by the name of the major food allergen, printed at the end of the ingredient list or next to it. For example: CONTAINS MILK.
  
  
• Use a parenthetical statement to clarify technical ingredient terms. For example: CASEIN (MILK), or WHEY (MILK).

Most labels already do have this information in the U.S. Still, making sure that all labels do is an important step for the millions who must watch out for potential allergens.

And the Act also calls for follow-ups, including a study on the effectiveness of the legislation and the collecting and publishing of research pertaining to food allergies.

Santa's Kringle Kruncher

Milk and cookies. Milk and cookies. Milk and cookies. Ten million more homes to go. Milk and cookies. Milk and cookies. Milk and cookies. No wonder Santa is a tub o' lard who needs to rest up for the next 364 days.

What Santa needs is some low-fat soy milk and dairy-free cookies. Or even better, something to get around all those calories.

So a huge cheer for Shelby Macy, 12, of Beaverton, Oregon, who won first prize in the pre-teen category in The [Portland] Oregonian's Design Santa's New Sled contest with the following entry:

"Blitzn" was a careful rendering of Santa's sleigh along with detailed descriptions of its features, which propelled this entry to the front. The sleigh features a toy/coal dispenser -- to supply the needs of both good and bad children -- and a unique Kringle Kruncher, which transforms milk and cookies into energy for a lactose-intolerant Santa.

Yay, Shelby!

Lactose Intolerant? Blame Your Ancestors

I've said this before, mainly in my book - Milk Is Not for Every Body - but whether you are or aren't lactose intolerant depends mostly on whether your ancestors were.
And your ancestors' decision whether or not to domesticate milkable animals for dairy products led to the spread of the mutation that allows for lactose tolerance all through adulthood.

More confirmation of this comes from the work of evolutionary biologist Paul Sherman, a professor of neurobiology and behavior at Cornell University. His work appeared in a recent issue of Evolution and Human Behavior, but I'm going to spare you and just quote from an article about it, written by Michael Kanellos at CNET News.

Researchers at Cornell University have shown in a recent study that lactose intolerance is largely a factor of cultural evolution. That is, members of ethnic groups that emerged in regions where raising cattle was common often are more genetically predisposed to digest milk products. Meanwhile, people whose ancestors came from regions where extreme temperatures, short growing seasons and dangerous animal-borne diseases made animal husbandry expensive and difficult often feel cramped and nauseous after eating dairy products.

In cheese-happy Denmark, for instance, only 2 percent of the population studied was lactose intolerant. In Zambia, near the equator, 100 percent of the individuals studied were lactose intolerant.

"The implication is that harsh climates and dangerous diseases negatively impact dairy herding and geographically restrict the availability of milk, and that humans have physiologically adapted to that," Sherman said.

The key to lactose intolerance is the enzyme lactase, which is required to digest milk. Although infants around the world produce the enzyme, more than half the people in the world, particularly those of Asian and African descent, stop producing it as they mature. People of northern European descent tend to continue to produce the enzyme because of a genetic mutation, according to Sherman. Thus, they can drink milk throughout life.

The full journal article can be found at Bloom, G. and P.W. Sherman. 2005. Dairying barriers and the distribution of lactose malabsorption. Evolution and Human Behavior 26:301-312.

Goat's Milk for Lactose Intolerants? No.

Due to the pernicious influence of the Internet, which spreads misinformation worldwide in seconds, I've been getting a lot of people asking whether they can switch to goat's milk if they are lactose intolerant.

The simple, direct, and correct answer is no.

Almost all of the animal milks that humans have used over the centuries are very close to one another in lactose content. They tend to have 4% - 5% lactose, allowing for the inevitable variations due to breeds and feeds. (See my Lactose Zoo page for detailed percentages.)

Why the confusion, then? Goat's milk – along with all the other animal milks – has a markedly different set of proteins, especially casein proteins, than cow's milk does. Those with Cow's Milk Protein Allergy (CMPA) may find that they can tolerate goat's milk without symptoms. Emphasis on the may. I would not suggest goat's milk to those severely anaphylactic to cow's milk. The rest of you with milk allergy, however, and that's the majority, may be in luck.

An article, "Cow or goat: which milk is better?", by Jane Clarke, in The Times of London adds some other advantages and warnings:

Some young children with eczema and other allergies may do better with goat’s milk formula than cow’s milk or soya milk products, as goat’s milk is much closer in molecular structure to mother’s milk. These formulas are also higher in essential fatty acids than cow’s milk formulas.

The mineral content of both milks is generally similar, although goat’s contains slightly less calcium and slightly more vitamin A, potassium and selenium, which is an antioxidant.

Finally, a warning to pregnant women. Listeria is found in unpasteurised goat’s milk, yoghurt and cheese, so you need to avoid all of these and drink only pasteurised goat’s milk. The FSA advises avoiding soft goat’s cheeses such as chèvre.

Lactose intolerance remains a problem with the lactose, so if you do try goat's milk, remember to take your lactase pills, just as you would when having cow's milk.

No Need to Avoid Milk Even If You Have Symptoms Says New Study

According to medpagetoday.com, a new study by a leading Finnish research team denies that cow's milk is the cause of their gastrointestinal symptoms.

HELSINKI, Finland, Dec. 16 - Milk and other lactose-rich products may be getting a bum rap for food-related gastrointestinal symptoms, researchers here say.

The real culprit could well be an as-yet uncharacterized intestinal immune-mediated disorder, reported Laura Paajanen, M.D., of the Foundation for Nutrition Research here in the December issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
…

"We conclude that food-related gastrointestinal symptoms in young adults are caused by unspecific and unknown traits of altered mucosal immune response rather than by cow milk, as is often suspected by the patient," the study authors wrote.

"We suggest that this new entity, i.e., intestinal immune-mediated disorder, may be a self-perpetuating disease with fluctuations in symptoms, they wrote. "An autoimmune characteristic of the syndrome, at least in a subgroup of the affected subjects, cannot be ruled out."

Individuals who avoid milk and diary products in the mistaken belief that these are the source of their GI symptoms may not be getting important nutrients, they added.

Primary source: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Source reference: Paajanen L et al. Cow milk not responsible for most gastrointestinal immune-like syndromes-evidence from a population-based study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2005; 82:1327-1235.

As I've often argued, never assume that all your symptoms are coming from one food unless you have done a lengthy and exhaustive food diary to carefully study every food that you are eating. Symptoms from food are often hard to pin down. Milk is not always to blame, and there is no need to take it out of your diet unless you are forced to.