Long-winded-rants of doom
I can't sleep. I'm tired but I can't sleep. So here I am.
My dad asked if I wanted M to come with us to see fireworks tomorrow this morning. I want her to go, obviously. But she can't because she has work. What kind of slave driver has people work until 10 on the 4th of July? I mean, she's a cashier, nobody's life is in danger. I wish she didn't work until closing all of the time. DX;
I want to see her so badly right now. I just want to talk with her and hold her hands and make sure that everything is okay. I don't even know what's going on with us right now because last time I saw her we were acting more like best friends than girlfriends. And I mean, if that's what she wants then that's great. But I think the only reason for it is because she doesn't want to get attached right before she moves.
She's only going to be like, 13 miles away from me, I'm sure we can work something out even if she is busy most of the time. And, I can send her e-mail and call her when I can't go over and see her. And that works for me, but I dunno if that works for her.
I dunno. Maybe I'm expecting too much.
But ehhh.. I dunno. Given some time, I could be happy with just friends too. But it's just that, I feel like she's so perfect for me, and I mean logically too not just "OMG love butterflies" because she understands me, and I trust her. And I just can't see myself getting into a fight with her, ever.
But enough about that, because now I just miss her more. XD; Hopefully I'll be able to see her tomorrow.
Hmm.
So I feel like ranting about my in-the-closet-but-it's-glaringly-obvious trans friend (MTF) (It was kind of sad that I figured out immediately that she's trans and A (the insanely dense, but gay friend of mine) didn't even think of that. XD ) because she's a sweetheart. Like pure sugar, except worse. I mean, I GAVE her my pencil because apparently she likes mechanical pencils for drawing with and she refused to take it even though she said she was going to be frustrated about it later. I was like *facepalm* XD.
But it's nice because she's also vegan and atheist so I have someone to talk to about that stuff without getting all "NO I DON'T WANNA HEAR THE TRUTH!" Because apparently it's fine to know that milk is bad for you but you don't want to hear about why because then you'll be uncomfortable with it. But if you're uncomfortable with the truth then it would make more sense to just not do something you're not comfortable with...? I have no problem with people drinking milk mind you. My problem is when people intentionally and knowingly reject the truth and don't want to listen because they KNOW that they'd feel uncomfortable with it (in this case, eating dairy or whatever) and then continue the habit. It doesn't make any sense to me at all. 0_0 Especially in the case of food and stuff because it's my body, that I'm stuck with, for the rest of my life thanks. And I want to know what the things I'm taking in are doing to it.
Okay, done ranting now. ^^
~Riku
If you are not getting confirmation e-mails from Oasis to complete your membership, don't hesitate to e-mail jeff at oasismag dot com. Be sure to include your username.
Recent articles
Recent journal entries
Active forum topics
Who's online
Online users
- niks121997
- Piedmon
- lost_in_wonderland
- Shannie92
Comments
ok stupid question: why is
ok stupid question: why is milk bad for you? i mean i knew its not good for you but i dont really know why. i can take the truth. (and just so u know i drink a lot of soymilk so im not a total dairy fiend)
If male homosexuals are called "gay," then female homosexuals should be called "ecstatic." ~Shelly Roberts
Reality, milk isn't that bad
Reality, milk isn't that bad for you. If it was, then why are so many humans lactose tolerant? Scientists know that the humans became lactose intolerant after about 6 months- 2 years in the past. Yet almost all humans now a day are lactose tolerant (with the exception of Native Americans and the Philippines). So that means that a genetic mutation occurred that allowed the lac operon to be on for an extended time. And through natural selection, those humans that are lactose tolerant have survived.
So according to genetics, milk really isn't that bad for you. Go figure!
Why could it be bad? Well that could be for a number of reasons seeing though it depends on the health of the milk cow. You've got a sick cow, you've got sick milk. If the cows does't eat grass, they become sick. And most cows are corn fed, not grass fed. Also, the corn tends to have synthetic pesticides on them. The cows are also injected with all those nasty antibiotics to keep them even marginally healthy (with the exception of hood, stoney field and booth brothers).
The calcium in milk is also actually pretttyyy useless. You see, calcium needs magnesium to be absorbed. Milk is rather deficient in that.
Milk and butter are also the main ingredients in baked goods. I mean if you ask any baker or pasty chef, the main ingredients are egg, water, flour, butter or milk in any combination. The substitutes to butter that can be used are all made of partially hydrogenated or hydrogenated oils. Those are pretty horrible. You'd best stay away from them.
My take on it? Fuck the vegans and vegetarians who say it's bad. It tastes good. It's the basis of yogurt and cheese, both I love. It makes me happy. And remember, when you're eating food it's not all about nutrition, it's also about it being psychosomatic.
Oh and ultra-pasteurization
Oh and ultra-pasteurization yields free glutamate. You folks that are afraid of the big ol' bad monosodium glutamate (MSG) should be afraid oh an free glutamate. You see MSG is just the salt form of glutamate.
Anyway, soy milk is also UP'd. milk in Europe is all UHT, not UP and it comes in a carton. Milk in the USA is just P'd, not UP'd. Cream and such is UP'd.
FYI, there are plenty,
FYI, there are plenty, plenty, PLENTY of good foods that don't have milk in them. And I personally think that milk is gross, so I go without. And not all food is about nutrition. I eat junk food too. (Like, this cake I had today. Most amazing vegan cake ever.) But I rather be eating things good for me more often. Especially since eating healthy makes me feel healthier which improves my mood. It's kind of a two-way-street.
But you know, I respect that kind of resolve because at least you're not saying "oh I don't want to know because then I'll feel weird about it." like so many people do. That drives me nuts. Why do something if you know you're not comfortable with what it actually does to you?
And in response to your genetics thing. All that proves is that the environment prefers lactose tolerant people, doesn't mean genetics are saying that milk is good for you, it just means that milk is put in practically everything today, and that makes it preferable to be lactose tolerant. It's adaptation. And all it says is that todays environment encourages lactose tolerance, which it does.
"Many people with ancestry
"Many people with ancestry in Europe, the Middle East, India, or parts of East Africa, maintain normal lactase production into adulthood. In many of these cultures, mammals such as cattle, goats, and sheep are milked for food. Hence, it was in these regions that genes for lifelong lactase production first evolved. The genes of lactose tolerance have evolved independently in various ethnic groups." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose)
Plus for this to actually take such a wide spread effect, natural selection and evolution demands that it take a good amount of time. Like a good 500 or 1000 years. That implies that it would of course predate any modern food industry, meaning that milk wasn't in food stuffs, because they didn't have food stuffs back then.
Granted, but still doesn't
Granted, but still doesn't make milk good for you. Just means that it was preferable by environment then too. Probably because it was readily available food. But that's not what I was getting at. Adaptation still doesn't mean its good for you. It just means that there's some kind of push from the environment to adapt. So they had a lot of milk then too. Just because somethings eaten commonly enough that people adapt to eating it, doesn't mean it's good for you. Some 500 or 1000 years ago life spans we're relatively short anyways. So something that very subtly has an effect on you wouldn't take priority. I'm sure that nobody (Or extremely close to nobody) noticed that milk weakens your bones. They probably figured it was a part of aging. I mean, people think that now. And it doesn't help that everyone is taught "Milk is good for you." Nowadays, including doctors who recommend it to their patients.
But I'm ranting now. All I was saying is that adaptation is just that, adaptation, and ALL it means is that there was some kind of push by the environment to adapt. It doesn't make something good for you, or even that the change in genetics says it is. It just means that it was very commonly available so it was used a lot. If you're not getting sick from your food all of the time, you're more likely to reproduce. People probably didn't even know about lactose intolerance until recently. For them it was probably just some people got sick more often than others. So lactose intolerant people would still be drinking and eating dairy stuff. Lactose tolerant people would be healthier, and there you go.
Natural Selection is
Natural Selection is nature's method of weeding out the bad attributes and keeping the good attributes. The fact that lactose tolerant people flourished and survived, while the intolerant died does mean something. That milk was actually good for you. Remember: pushes don't come randomly, they come for a reason.
But I will admit, it is true that milk isn't the greatest for you. Kale definitely is about 12 pegs higher than milk.
Anyway, by far, milk isn't that bad for you compared to other things in the grocery store. For example, look at butter substitutes. All of them, with a few exceptions, are made of entirely hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils. You'd be best to avoid those. And then all the stuff in the middle of grocery stores have a huge amount of carbohydrates in them, lowest being probably around 40% carbohydrate. And studies have shown that carbohydrates can actually induce obesity, metabolic syndrome and diabetes.
So to just bash milk like such, in my mind is fucking retarded. Anyone who even touches any processed foods and bashes milk to me is a health hypocrite.
The pushes were there
The pushes were most likely there because of what was readily available and what wasn't. What cultural things there were to go with milk, and it's convenience. You can make cheese, butter, and other things with milk, Which help to make more filling meals. There's a lot of cultural stuff surrounding milk too. The push doesn't mean it's healthy.
By the same reasoning as yours, sickle cell is a good thing. Sickle cell is more common in Africa. People with sickle cell don't get malaria, which can be fatal. People carrying sickle cell were living longer and more likely to reproduce than the people getting malaria. Doesn't mean that having a sickle cell gene is a good thing. Because so many people carry it, people born there are more likely to get it.
What I'm saying is, natural selection only comes down too what prevents you from reproducing first. Back 1000 or 500 years ago, they had minimal knowledge about sickness and biology and things of that sort. People were getting sick and dying all of the time. And most of the time they didn't know what was causing it. So people who were lactose intolerant would still be consuming lactose,because if you didn't eat what was available, you didn't eat. But they'd be sick often because of it. People who are sick all of the time are less likely to reproduce. And that's all it comes down too. There was an environmental push for milk due to it's convenience, they didn't know about nutrition or any of that back then.
And I'm not "bashing" milk. Milks negative effects outweigh the benefits for me. There are other places to get vitamins D and B12. And I hate misinformation. Most people think milk is good for them and their bones when in reality it's not. It's the honest truth. And I don't like that people think that milk does one thing when it does the exact opposite. I'm not blaming them for their ignorance though. I'm blaming the milk industry for misinforming people, and all of that government endorsement doesn't help at all. And most people are just taught since forever "Milk is good for you" so they have a hard time believing that it's not. But I'm not bashing milk. I'm not saying "Don't drink it or you'll die" I'm saying that milk isn't good for you, and I personally dislike it enough do avoid it. You can make your own decision on what you want to drink or eat. That doesn't matter to me. But I was explaining my reasoning and correcting you because (And I mean this in the politest, most objective way possible.) you made the assumption that an adaptation to milk sugars must have been caused by milk being good for you. You have no evidence to support this hypothesis over any other possible reason, yet you continue to state it like it's fact. I've been trying to explain to you that one is not a direct lead on the other. But it's like you totally missed it.
And sorry if I seem rude. I honestly don't mean to... But sometimes I come off as such.
The only natural source of
The only natural source of Vitamin D is the sun. Any other source is absolutely useless. It's a little known fact that fortification actually does nothing. That includes multivitamins. It has to do with the fact that vitamins and nutrients exist in symbiotic relationships. Sort of like Calcium+Vitamin D+Magnesium. But the relationships are way more complex and surpass our ability to comprehend it.
I'm also pretty curious with how milk actually weakens our bones. You also do realize you can buy milk that doesn't have any hormones put into it through the cow, right? All the major brands in Vermont are hormone free. Cabot, Hood, Booth Brothers, Stoney Field (yea, they're NH, but who the fuck cares?) and all those local suppliers. And every food in the United States has a good amount of pesticides on/in it. with apples, apricots, peaches and bell peppers having the highest concentrations.
Milk doesn't even come close to unhealthy by today's standards. For example, take a look at anything in the center of the supermarket. The cereal isles is 90% carbohydrate. Soda, 100% carbohydrate. Bread, 90% carbohydrate. Little Debbie type snake foods >70% carbohydrate. Do you see a pattern?
Carbohydrates, especially simple and refined carbohydrates cause metabolic syndrome, diabetes and obesity. In fact, people of non-European decent can actually get very sick from this high of a carbohydrate intake. We as humans are more geared towards digesting fats and proteins with a small amount of carbohydrates. And with those carbohydrates comes dietary fiber.
There was also a famous studies down 40 or 50 years ago that took Aussies from the bush that had adopted the Western diet of hyper-processing and high-carbohydrate intake and had developed near obesity, diabetes, tooth decay and a host of other problems. An MD put these Aussies back into the bush, subjecting them to their traditional diets. They all recovered fully.
Oh, and there was a dental study done on Swiss Mountaineers about 60 or 70 years ago. They had this weird slime on their teeth, almost green colored. Their carbohydrate intake was minimal. They had virtually no tooth decay. They hadn't brushed their teeth ever. They also didn't have dental problems needing any for of correction.
Eating bread is worse than drinking milk. Bread also has a substantially higher amount of N-6 fats. Our ratio of N-3:N-6 fats was/should be 1:3. The ratio now a days is 1:20. Milk's ratio is about 1:2. Whole wheat multigrain bread is about 1:8.
N-6 fats are the precursors to inflammatory hormones and messengers. They aggravate arthritis.
Also milk has about 9 grams of protein in it per cup. That's really not that bad. The WHO currently places the DV of protein at about 52 grams, with vegetarians having a slightly higher intake, around 60 or 65. It's also pretty close to being complete.
Well, lactose tolerance is
Well, lactose tolerance is preferable in todays world because milk is used so much. So it makes sense that the population is adjusting. Healthier people reproduce more. Adaptation. Though a bit artificial in this case. There are a lot of allergens in milk too, but yeah, that aside.
Well, for starters, Milk has an awful lot of protein in it, (It's for growing calves, so of course it does.) FAR more protein than you need. So much that it sets off a chemical imbalance of sorts, And you end up loosing calcium because of this. (I don't remember the details, I can't be expected to remember everything. XD;)
There's also the bit about hormones, and the bit about pesticides and other things that aren't necessarily good for you getting into the milk.
If you're really curious about this, you can try google or notmilk.com. I'm sure there's much more information there than what I could put out. XD
I'm working 4'-close
I'm working 4'-close today... Well, I am a life guard too so if I don't show up, we have some prettttyyyy angry patrons.