There is something significant and interesting here to consider around the foods we eat. How does history/social norms dictate food choice?
With milk specifically therE was new research talking about how it is unusual that we can drink milk at all [0]. Most of the world has trouble with Milk, but interestingly Europeans had developed the ability to digest milk.
Fast forward to today, milk primarily comes from “European” cows. However this “new” A2 milk comes from a different kind of cow and at least in theory doesn’t have the issues that typical (European) cows have.
When my first son was born, and now with our second, they both had issues when my wife would eat dairy. At the time I researched this extensively, and went as far as tried to acquire this “Jersey Cow milk”. Unfortunately, at the time I just couldn’t get it where I live. If this is now a true “thing” I would be really excited to see if it would allow my wife to drink milk while producing milk herself.
We should probably clarify that it's cow milk that Europeans seem unusually well-equipped to digest. Mongols have drank horse milk for a very long time, ever since they were horse nomads.
I'm not sure whether you're trying to make a link between Europeans being able to digest milk and milk from Jersey cows somehow being more healthy than that of "European" cows, but I think that'd be nonsense.
The channel islands are essentially part of Europe, and I doubt that inhabitants of Jersey somehow have a different level of milk tolerance that'd cause them to selectively breed cattle with the A2 variant of the protein. It's more likely that the variation is due to random chance amplified by breeding many cows starting with only a few ancestors.
Have you tried goats milk? It's naturally A2, and can be easier for some stomachs. I actually make a goat's milk yogurt that, when left to ferment long enough (to consume all the lactose), has been perfectly fine on many friends' stomaches who usually claim some form of dairy intolerance.
I highly recommend those that have trouble with milk to try Oatly... especially their (now sold out) Barista Blend. It's the closest thing to milk that isn't. The mouthfeel of the barista blend is amazingly the same.
Don't buy the Pacific brand, it's crap in comparison.
US run-of-the-mill milk isn’t even what most people would think it is.
Typical “non-industrial” way of getting “milk” is to milk a cow into some bucket/pan to hold the liquid. It will start separating and cream will float to the top. It gets skimmed and used for other products. What’s below is normal milk.
In US (no clue where else), the milk is separated to get ALL fats out first. The the right amounts of fats are recombined with the liquid left over, often fortified with some vitamins and sold as “milk”. This is where you get the exact, perfectly non-separating, homogeneous product, with predictable fat contents.
EDIT: there is also mechanical homogenization process as noted in comment below that does not use chemicals, but instead mechanically breaks down clumps of fats to make them more dissolvable.
Problem is, once you separate the fats and then mix them back in, they don’t exactly want to stay mixed. For this you use stabilizers and other chemicals.
EU apparently is pretty strict on what these “stabilizers” can be, by specific dairy product. US appears to be in an arms race with itself to make these more intricate. These also can be allergens.
Don’t know how wide-spread this is, but I know over a dozen people that are “lactose-intolerant” in US, but can consume dairy quite safely in EU.
A2 could be hitting on something similar, but for some people even non-homogenized milk from the Holsteins (supposedly containing the evil A1) could be the answer.
I can't comment on what the US allows, but the normal process of standardising and homogenising doesn't involve any additives. The fats and a liquid known as permeate are separated from the milk via centrifuges and filters. Then the parts are tested and recombined to produce a given level of fat, protein and lactose. After this the milk is homogenised by forcing through a screen which breaks up the fats and then pasteurised. There's no need for additives in this process as milk is naturally an emulsion.
One reason for homogenisation is the pasteurisation process causes the fats to clump together and rise. This is exploited when making clotted cream.
Personally I buy non-homogenised milk as I prefer the taste, but that's just me,
Stabilizers and emulsifiers are only used in beverages made from milk (chocolate or strawberry milk) and heavy whipping creams. They are not used in normal dairy products, even homogenized ones.
It’s not like he has a vested interest or anything.
It doesn’t take much google time to get a more informed answer. The numbers in the studies aren’t large but it’s presumably hard to get ethics for feeding people with a severe stroke intolerance something that is closely related to the allergen. Starting small would seem logical.
Of course, things like "easier to digest" are neither a nutritive nor health benefit, so technically both that statement and some of the pro-A2 claims could simultaneously be true.
> Although the science behind so-called A2 milk remains disputed, the entry of big companies into the market shows how changing consumer preferences create new opportunities that dairy giants can’t afford to ignore—especially as profits have been eroded in recent years by everything from almond milk to dairy-free ice cream.
Some days I want them to stop all AI research and get to work on an extension that removes all weasel words from articles.
I've been waiting for this to go mainstream for a long time. Unfortunately, my experience of mainstream milk is it's generally pretty crappy, mostly because of how it's produced. In New Zealand, the average "milk" is pretty disappointing.
I've enjoyed A2 milk in the past but it's always been from boutique farms and most of the time they don't scale up (e.g. Ridge A2 Milk was a company which produced a great product but failed ~2010 I guess due to lack of traction).
I'm not sure whether it's better milk because of the chemical structure, or because it's not reconstituted in a factory. I'm personally enjoying Naturalea milk, it's one of the few I can actually enjoy (http://goodmanfielder.com/portfolio/naturalea/). I think that their entire production process yields a better product, something that Fonterra will unlikely be able to achieve because they scale their production while minimising cost.
I'd rather pay a bit more and get milk I enjoy. Boutique A2 milk is some of the best I've had.
> In New Zealand, the average "milk" is pretty disappointing.
Genuinely surprised. One of the things I hate about living in the US is the terrible milk. I have a hard time drinking it. I don’t know what they do to it here but it comes with a gross, almost off aftertaste. (It also seems to have a surprisingly long shelf life.) New Zealand milk is amazing by comparison. It’s one of the things I love about going home. :-)
Depending on where you live there are better options for milk. In the Seattle area, local to me, it's possible to find vat pasteurized milk from grass fed cows in many of the slightly upscale organic stores.
Paywalled but some background for readers outside Australia:
The supermarket duopoly Coles/Woolworths have had a pricing war by selling substandard 'milk' at a loss to encourage customers through their stores. The result has been many farmers and smaller dairies struggling financially, e.g the Murray Goulburn cooperative forced to sell its operations to Canadian Saputo recently. FWIW, I normally buy Jonesy's and the local deli has recently started selling St David's - processed in suburban Melbourne.
A2 is thus one smaller brand seeking market differentiation through improved product - it all tastes just like milk to me but I then don't have the protein intolerance.
I've found that milk alternatives have more than 20 ingredients in them. I don't understand what half of them are, and I don't know what long term effects such milks have. I'd love to switch to an alternative, but haven't found one without several additives in them.
I think that some EU court ruled that only actual milk can be called milk so no more Soy Milk, Almond Milk etc. Don't think that it is enforced anywhere yet.
> A genetic test, developed by the a2 Milk Company, determines whether a cow produces A2 or A1 type protein in its milk. The test allows the company to certify milk producers as producing milk that does not metabolise to β-casomorphin 7.
It's not a hoax at all. The ability to digest lactose is due to a mutation in humans that began in Europe thousands of years ago. It's about as far from a hoax as you can get: You either produce the lactase enzyme (required to break down lactose) or you don't.
I think alot of it is generalized without enough scientific analysis/limited by current technology.
"Lactose intolerance" could be many different reactions that could be not lactose specifically with many individuals.
Could be a byproduct commonly found with lactose(and maybe the a2 milk process removes that)
(similar to how recent, debated, studies for gluten intolerance may not be specifically gluten for many people, could be a similar by product/chemical/reaction to something commonly produced with gluten).
Or maybe it's not a hoax and you are misdiagnosed. You might have cow milk protein allergy/intolerance, which is an allergic reaction that happens only in the digestive tract.
Try eating some dried/cured meat that has lactose added as a conservative. No issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try taking some medicine that has lactose added as a binding agent. No issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try eating any cured cheese such as Cheddar or Edam (0.0 g lactose, but check the carbs/sugars label to be sure). Issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try drinking normal milk and then the same thing with exogenous lactase (e.g. Lactaid). Issues without lactase, but no issues with it? Lactose intolerant. Issues with both or no issues with any? Not lactose intolerant.
It's fairly easy to self-diagnose as long as you know how the intolerance works (an enzyme is missing in your digestive tract) and the lactose content of things.
As another linked article attests, this milk doesn’t do anything in regards to lactose. It instead is a milk that uses a less common (in the Western World) A2 type of Casein Protein instead of A1 type. There are various health claims about A2 and A1 that have nothing to do with lactose intolerance. Lactose is a sugar in milk, and casein the main protein component.
It's clearly not, and the mechanism is well understood; however, lots of people who think they are lactose intolerant are mis-(and usually self-)diagnosed, and really have allergies to one or more proteins found in milk (and this has also been widely known for a long time), which is completely different than lactose intolerance.
HN does blacklist domains. Here's the blacklisted domain list from 2009[1]. Here's a blog post examining penalties applied to posts, some of the penalties are based on the domain[2].
I've developed somewhat of a brain ad-on to bypass the paywall: click on the address bar and select all, cut, type "archive.is", paste in the search box, press enter.
The WSJ would be much better served by requiring a free, easy login with an email or social account, then throttle down the number of free articles one can read. Turning down people interested in your product that you could offer a sample at zero marginal cost to you seems such a poor business decision.
[+] [-] zem|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aerophilic|8 years ago|reply
With milk specifically therE was new research talking about how it is unusual that we can drink milk at all [0]. Most of the world has trouble with Milk, but interestingly Europeans had developed the ability to digest milk.
Fast forward to today, milk primarily comes from “European” cows. However this “new” A2 milk comes from a different kind of cow and at least in theory doesn’t have the issues that typical (European) cows have.
When my first son was born, and now with our second, they both had issues when my wife would eat dairy. At the time I researched this extensively, and went as far as tried to acquire this “Jersey Cow milk”. Unfortunately, at the time I just couldn’t get it where I live. If this is now a true “thing” I would be really excited to see if it would allow my wife to drink milk while producing milk herself.
[0] http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/story?id=8450036
[+] [-] philwelch|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yorwba|8 years ago|reply
The channel islands are essentially part of Europe, and I doubt that inhabitants of Jersey somehow have a different level of milk tolerance that'd cause them to selectively breed cattle with the A2 variant of the protein. It's more likely that the variation is due to random chance amplified by breeding many cows starting with only a few ancestors.
[+] [-] pugio|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neonate|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] King-Aaron|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] azinman2|8 years ago|reply
Don't buy the Pacific brand, it's crap in comparison.
[+] [-] sologoub|8 years ago|reply
Typical “non-industrial” way of getting “milk” is to milk a cow into some bucket/pan to hold the liquid. It will start separating and cream will float to the top. It gets skimmed and used for other products. What’s below is normal milk.
In US (no clue where else), the milk is separated to get ALL fats out first. The the right amounts of fats are recombined with the liquid left over, often fortified with some vitamins and sold as “milk”. This is where you get the exact, perfectly non-separating, homogeneous product, with predictable fat contents.
EDIT: there is also mechanical homogenization process as noted in comment below that does not use chemicals, but instead mechanically breaks down clumps of fats to make them more dissolvable.
Problem is, once you separate the fats and then mix them back in, they don’t exactly want to stay mixed. For this you use stabilizers and other chemicals.
EU apparently is pretty strict on what these “stabilizers” can be, by specific dairy product. US appears to be in an arms race with itself to make these more intricate. These also can be allergens.
Don’t know how wide-spread this is, but I know over a dozen people that are “lactose-intolerant” in US, but can consume dairy quite safely in EU.
A2 could be hitting on something similar, but for some people even non-homogenized milk from the Holsteins (supposedly containing the evil A1) could be the answer.
[+] [-] sitharus|8 years ago|reply
One reason for homogenisation is the pasteurisation process causes the fats to clump together and rise. This is exploited when making clotted cream.
Personally I buy non-homogenised milk as I prefer the taste, but that's just me,
[+] [-] DEFCON28|8 years ago|reply
Stabilizers and emulsifiers are only used in beverages made from milk (chocolate or strawberry milk) and heavy whipping creams. They are not used in normal dairy products, even homogenized ones.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk#Creaming_and_homogenizati...
[+] [-] mrmondo|8 years ago|reply
- Greg Miller, chief science officer at the National Dairy Council in the U.S.
[+] [-] lostlogin|8 years ago|reply
It doesn’t take much google time to get a more informed answer. The numbers in the studies aren’t large but it’s presumably hard to get ethics for feeding people with a severe stroke intolerance something that is closely related to the allergen. Starting small would seem logical.
[+] [-] white-flame|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brownbat|8 years ago|reply
Some days I want them to stop all AI research and get to work on an extension that removes all weasel words from articles.
[+] [-] 8077628|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ioquatix|8 years ago|reply
I've enjoyed A2 milk in the past but it's always been from boutique farms and most of the time they don't scale up (e.g. Ridge A2 Milk was a company which produced a great product but failed ~2010 I guess due to lack of traction).
I'm not sure whether it's better milk because of the chemical structure, or because it's not reconstituted in a factory. I'm personally enjoying Naturalea milk, it's one of the few I can actually enjoy (http://goodmanfielder.com/portfolio/naturalea/). I think that their entire production process yields a better product, something that Fonterra will unlikely be able to achieve because they scale their production while minimising cost.
I'd rather pay a bit more and get milk I enjoy. Boutique A2 milk is some of the best I've had.
[+] [-] erentz|8 years ago|reply
Genuinely surprised. One of the things I hate about living in the US is the terrible milk. I have a hard time drinking it. I don’t know what they do to it here but it comes with a gross, almost off aftertaste. (It also seems to have a surprisingly long shelf life.) New Zealand milk is amazing by comparison. It’s one of the things I love about going home. :-)
[+] [-] InclinedPlane|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] petecox|8 years ago|reply
The supermarket duopoly Coles/Woolworths have had a pricing war by selling substandard 'milk' at a loss to encourage customers through their stores. The result has been many farmers and smaller dairies struggling financially, e.g the Murray Goulburn cooperative forced to sell its operations to Canadian Saputo recently. FWIW, I normally buy Jonesy's and the local deli has recently started selling St David's - processed in suburban Melbourne.
A2 is thus one smaller brand seeking market differentiation through improved product - it all tastes just like milk to me but I then don't have the protein intolerance.
[+] [-] phoneyphone|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nowarninglabel|8 years ago|reply
I also really enjoy Califia Farms' Coconut Almond Milk.
And for ice cream, Coconut Bliss I find to be even better than the real stuff.
Your mileage may vary of course.
[+] [-] neeleshs|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theBobBob|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] freedomben|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gwern|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ctrlrsf|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] agitator|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rhcom2|8 years ago|reply
> A genetic test, developed by the a2 Milk Company, determines whether a cow produces A2 or A1 type protein in its milk. The test allows the company to certify milk producers as producing milk that does not metabolise to β-casomorphin 7.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A2_milk
[+] [-] davidpaulyoung|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxerickson|8 years ago|reply
They use the test to certify herds as producing the A2 milk.
[+] [-] jamiethompson|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] garyvee_|8 years ago|reply
As a lactard, I can attest—I tried this and didn’t have any indigestion problems. Maybe lactose intolerance is a hoax.
[+] [-] abrookewood|8 years ago|reply
1. https://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-the-milk-revolution-... 2. https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/lactose-intolerance#source...
[+] [-] sergers|8 years ago|reply
"Lactose intolerance" could be many different reactions that could be not lactose specifically with many individuals. Could be a byproduct commonly found with lactose(and maybe the a2 milk process removes that)
(similar to how recent, debated, studies for gluten intolerance may not be specifically gluten for many people, could be a similar by product/chemical/reaction to something commonly produced with gluten).
[+] [-] glastra|8 years ago|reply
Try eating some dried/cured meat that has lactose added as a conservative. No issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try taking some medicine that has lactose added as a binding agent. No issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try eating any cured cheese such as Cheddar or Edam (0.0 g lactose, but check the carbs/sugars label to be sure). Issues? Not lactose intolerant.
Try drinking normal milk and then the same thing with exogenous lactase (e.g. Lactaid). Issues without lactase, but no issues with it? Lactose intolerant. Issues with both or no issues with any? Not lactose intolerant.
It's fairly easy to self-diagnose as long as you know how the intolerance works (an enzyme is missing in your digestive tract) and the lactose content of things.
[+] [-] maxerickson|8 years ago|reply
Use lots and you'll for sure know if you are lactase deficient.
[+] [-] Moto7451|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dragonwriter|8 years ago|reply
It's clearly not, and the mechanism is well understood; however, lots of people who think they are lactose intolerant are mis-(and usually self-)diagnosed, and really have allergies to one or more proteins found in milk (and this has also been widely known for a long time), which is completely different than lactose intolerance.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mattspitz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamiethompson|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] NetOpWibby|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psychometry|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|8 years ago|reply
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16928127 and marked it off-topic.
[+] [-] Buge|8 years ago|reply
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=499044
[2] http://www.righto.com/2013/11/how-hacker-news-ranking-really...
[+] [-] cornholio|8 years ago|reply
The WSJ would be much better served by requiring a free, easy login with an email or social account, then throttle down the number of free articles one can read. Turning down people interested in your product that you could offer a sample at zero marginal cost to you seems such a poor business decision.
[+] [-] briandear|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DEFCON28|8 years ago|reply