Calcium content of common foods
Harvard Health Services has given me this gem: http://huhs.harvard.edu/HealthInformation/CWHCWellnessInformationCalciumContent.htm
I believe that I can now move past the got milk lies entirely, as cheese does in fact have a much higher calcium content than milk. That and the fact that most American processed foods are nutrient fortified, and most of us don't need to be making the extra effort to drink whatever ridiculous amount of milk they're pretending we need to drink.
What's more, many, many people are slightly or entirely lactose intolerant and do not know it. In general, cheeses and yogurts are less irritating for lactose intolerant people, because the organisms eat a lot of the lactose. Some of this unawareness of lactose intolerance comes from the over-campaigning for milk as some kind of freaky nature cure to everything. Everyone needs milk, so how can I cope if I can't drink it? And while I can reasonably avoid milk, some kids on free or reduced lunch in school can't without a doctors note. If the school thinks you can't afford lunch, it might be tough to get to a doctor who'll necesarily agree you need calcium orange juice. 75 percent of African-Americans and 90 percent of Asian-Americans are lactose intolerant, although I'm not sure to what degree that's measured, as some people are a lot more lactose intolerant than others.
And sure, cheese is fattening. But milk is not without it's content, and it doesn't get you full. In that way, not making you full, milk can get more calories in certain eaters than cheese, and that might be more calories than we need.
Lowfat yougurt has a whole lot more than a standard glass of milk, although I would consider 8 ounces of that stuff to be way more than a standard serving. Four tablespoons of parmesan has a lot more calcium than a glass of milk, so the next time I'm unsure if I'm getting my calcium, I'll pour some on something, or let a waiter stand over my salad for a solid minute with a grater.
Most of this applies just to me. I'm not sure how much parmesean everyone else eats, lowfat yogurt isn't common or really all that appealing. Mostly people who are severely lactose intolerant really care about it, so other dairy products aren't seen as a replacement for milk, plus people don't know about their calcium content, plus people worry about the fat content of cheese.
It's a complicated question, and I have been more anti-milk in the past. I still think the mentality around it is built on a "how much milk can you possibly drink" contest for kids. Milk many more hormones and drugs in it than beef does, meaning at least beef is off the hook for the most part for not being organic enough-- and the problem that we're looking at there is probably from EDCs, and no, there aren't any on finished plastic products. That's a whole 'nother rant.
I believe that I can now move past the got milk lies entirely, as cheese does in fact have a much higher calcium content than milk. That and the fact that most American processed foods are nutrient fortified, and most of us don't need to be making the extra effort to drink whatever ridiculous amount of milk they're pretending we need to drink.
What's more, many, many people are slightly or entirely lactose intolerant and do not know it. In general, cheeses and yogurts are less irritating for lactose intolerant people, because the organisms eat a lot of the lactose. Some of this unawareness of lactose intolerance comes from the over-campaigning for milk as some kind of freaky nature cure to everything. Everyone needs milk, so how can I cope if I can't drink it? And while I can reasonably avoid milk, some kids on free or reduced lunch in school can't without a doctors note. If the school thinks you can't afford lunch, it might be tough to get to a doctor who'll necesarily agree you need calcium orange juice. 75 percent of African-Americans and 90 percent of Asian-Americans are lactose intolerant, although I'm not sure to what degree that's measured, as some people are a lot more lactose intolerant than others.
And sure, cheese is fattening. But milk is not without it's content, and it doesn't get you full. In that way, not making you full, milk can get more calories in certain eaters than cheese, and that might be more calories than we need.
Lowfat yougurt has a whole lot more than a standard glass of milk, although I would consider 8 ounces of that stuff to be way more than a standard serving. Four tablespoons of parmesan has a lot more calcium than a glass of milk, so the next time I'm unsure if I'm getting my calcium, I'll pour some on something, or let a waiter stand over my salad for a solid minute with a grater.
Most of this applies just to me. I'm not sure how much parmesean everyone else eats, lowfat yogurt isn't common or really all that appealing. Mostly people who are severely lactose intolerant really care about it, so other dairy products aren't seen as a replacement for milk, plus people don't know about their calcium content, plus people worry about the fat content of cheese.
It's a complicated question, and I have been more anti-milk in the past. I still think the mentality around it is built on a "how much milk can you possibly drink" contest for kids. Milk many more hormones and drugs in it than beef does, meaning at least beef is off the hook for the most part for not being organic enough-- and the problem that we're looking at there is probably from EDCs, and no, there aren't any on finished plastic products. That's a whole 'nother rant.