I occasionally hear of lactose intolerant people reporting that raw milk doesn't induce the same symptoms as pasteurized. It makes me wonder how it might operate. As far as I know, there is only one scientific study that has compared symptoms in lactose intolerant people consuming raw and pasteurized milk and it was quite striking in the results.
In this double-blind study raw milk produced nearly identical effects as did pasteurized milk. There were some people that were at the low end of the symptoms with raw milk and perhaps your partner would fall in that range, but the overall pattern is strong. Ironically, the study was funded, in part, by the Weston Price foundation.
All this might sound like I'm against raw milk. I'm not. I was raised on raw milk from birth until the time I left home as an adult. I personally milked most of that from the time I was big enough to carry the bucket. I think that people should be able to sell raw milk and people should be able to buy it. I think there may be benefits to raw vs. pasteurized, but the studies just aren't there to support that yet. I have to say though, raw milk did not help with my lactose intolerance.
Hmm, interesting information. It does point out one of the comments I believe I had previously mentioned earlier. It's very possible that a large amount of those claiming "lactose intolerant" are misdiagnosed. As with a great many of our diseases, doctors most likely go with patient disclosure rather than scientific testing. That's one of the problems with the antibiotic dilemma right now. Based on verbal testimony, it may or may not be a particular disease, but we are going to prescribe this and if it doesn't work, come back in two weeks. Even though testing for lactose intolerance is extremely easy, it doesn't appear widely done. That double-blind study would support that belief. Of 63 patients who made it past the initial screening, 36 failed the hydrogen breath test. That's 57% of the applicants. Have you had the scientific testing done or is it self-diagnosed/verbally diagnosed? I'm quite curious to know. This stuff fascinates me. My personal experience with my eldest daughter has confirmed this, but it was impossible to get our insurance to cover the cost for the intolerance testing. And at over $600, we can't afford it. After a fluke accident with Halloween candy, we think it was more of a too-healthy diet lacking sugars than the intolerance.
The study leads me to several problems and further questions that definitely need studied. If 57% of the applicants failed the HBT, what was their true diagnosis and what affect does raw milk actually have on them? If all of this rejected "lactose intolerant" population could truly benefit from raw milk, I would think it would definitely be something worth exploring. Second, which was readily admitted by the authors in the abstract I found, was that this was a very, very small sample size by nearly all standards. Sixteen test subjects would essentially amount to a high school science project. Those sample rates have never been acceptable in any other study I've seen and are immediately pointed out by the pro-vaccination crowds especially. It's a good foundation and I'm not opposed to it as an initial study, but it needs some serious expansion in to a nationwide study.
But more importantly, I think the primary flaw in the study is the duration of exposure. The probiotics we have taken and have in our house currently, state that it may take one to three weeks for severe symptoms to diminish, while healthy persons may take significantly longer to notice an improvement. The study used 8-day periods for testing, which would be a short period of time for a person with severely unbalanced flora to notice any difference, before using a clean-out diet and restarting the cycle. The effects of probiotics is a long-term situation and needs a proper study to determine those true effects. For multiple dose trials, the FDA has a minimum recommended period of 2 weeks, if I am reading their criteria correctly. I can tell you that recovering from a regular upset stomach which results in diarrhea takes longer than a week!
I think the single most important thing is that we need far more unbiased research in to these types of topics. Right along with this, though, is the absolute requirement for more sanitary and humane methods of husbandry. The types of animal keeping that the commercial industries maintain is despicable and only permitted because of their ridiculously large pocketbooks. Organic Pastures and PolyFace Farms are prime examples of how pure, organic, humane and clean farming operations can be extremely successful.
I didn't think there were possums in AZ.
