Milk/Dairy causes DHT production?

[Rutt]

The mechanism of stimulation of prostate gland activity has been well-defined by Labrie and the enzymatic pathways (the intracrine system) present in the pilosebaceous unit are also present in prostate gland,10 leaving it open to stimulation by the same milk/dairy-sourced hormones and DHT precursors that likely stimulate acne. We are learning that reducing the amount of DHT produced in a prostate cancer patient through inhibition of the action of 5?-reductase will control the disease to a certain extent.11 Dutasteride, a potent, selective, irreversible inhibitor of type 1 and type 2 5?-reductase, seems made for the job.12 But efficient though it is in reducing endogenous DHT, the 5?-P and 5?-A in dairy products provide the prostate's intracrine system with DHT precursors that are already 5?-reduced.

Source : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2715202/

Wow I wasn't aware of this and just stumbled upon it reading about a fitness program. I didn't realize it was possible to get DHT precursors which were already 5?-reduced

I apologize if this is a repeat as its dated 2009 but wow, makes you wonder all the possible sources of DHT.

I mean in theory if you take dutasteride that inhibits close to all DHT production and if you were able to cut any other sources out you should physicologically never lose hair.

 

[Rutt]

As a side note it's really annoying how any searchs to look for diet changes to avoid DHT precursosrs/etc turn up stupid f*****g pseudoscienctific all natural cures.

Saw palmetto sounds interesting

 

[anxious1]

Saw palmetto sounds interesting

yes saw palmetto works just the same as finasteride but its natural so theres no side effects.

many people have regrown hair with saw palmetto.

BS!


:band: :lost: :lost: :lost: :band:

 

[moseymoose]

I guess as finfighter suggested it might be a good idea switching to organic products.

But avoiding dairy products? Personally I don't think you should substitute a balanced diet for the slight possibility that it might minutely affect the activity of a5r/dht etc. unless of course you are lactose intolerant.

After all, if you're not healthy neither is your hair, right..surely?

 

[Bryan]

Just a thought. Humans are the only species on the planet that consumes milk/dairy into adulthood. Not only that... it is milk/dairy from a different animal than ourselves.

Put a saucer of cow's milk down on the ground in front of a cat or a dog, and watch what happens!

The point, of course, is that other animals would drink it into adulthood, if they had it available to them.

 

[freakout]

During the 1930's, Dr. Francis M. Pottenger conducted a 10-year study on the relative effects of pasteurized and raw milk diets on 900 cats. One group received nothing but raw whole milk, while the other was fed nothing but pasteurized whole milk from the same source.
The raw milk group thrived, remaining healthy, active and alert throughout their lives, but the group fed on pasteurized milk soon became listless, confused and highly vulnerable to a host of chronic degenerative ailments normally associated with humans, including heart disease, kidney failure, thyroid dysfunction, respiratory ailments, loss of teeth, brittle bones, liver inflammation, etc.

But what caught Dr. Pottenger's attention most was what happened to the second and third generations.

The first offspring of the pasteurized milk group were all born with poor teeth and small, weak bones- a clear cut sign of calcium deficiency, which indicated lack of calcium absorption from pasteurized milk.

The offspring of the raw milk group remained as healthy as their parents.
Many of the kittens in third generation of the pasteurized group were stillborn, while those that survived were all sterile and unable to reproduce.

The experiment had to end there because there was no fourth generation of cats fed on pasteurized milk, although the raw milk group continued to breed and thrive indefinitely.
If that is insufficient proof of the ill effects of pasteurized milk, take note of the fact even that newborn calves fed on pasteurized milk taken from their own mother cows usually die within six months, a fact which the commercial dairy industry is loathe to admit.
Despite such scientific evidence in favor of raw milk and against pasteurized milk, and despite the fact that until the early twentieth century the human species thrived on raw milk, it is actually illegal to sell raw milk to consumers in all but a few states in America today.

It is far more profitable to the dairy industry to pasteurize milk to extend its shelf-life, though such denatured milk does nothing whatsoever to extend human life.
Furthermore, pasteurization renders milk from sick cows in unsanitary dairies relatively 'harmless' by killing some, but not all, dangerous germs, and this too cuts costs for the dairy industry.

It required only three generations for Dr. Pottenger's pasteurized milk fed cats to become sterile and enfeebled. That's about how many generations of Americans and Europeans have fed on pasteurized milk. Today, infertility has become a major problem for your American couples, while calcium deficiency has become so rampant that over 90 percent of all American children suffer chronic tooth decay.

LOOK AT THE INCREDIBLE POWER OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY ON CONGRESS.

 

[dpdr]

IGF-1/Milk/Estrogen

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=52926

 

[anxious1]

Put a saucer of cow's milk down on the ground in front of a cat or a dog, and watch what happens!

The point, of course, is that other animals would drink it into adulthood, if they had it available to them.

yes, but should they? yes a cat or dog loves to drink milk, but its not like its their nature to suck on the tit of another animal. They only drink it because we give it to them

I've always thought its weird. Milk is the food we provide for our young before they can get food for themselves. Humans naturally drink breast milk for a little while then progress to other food.

think about it. As adults we r drinking the food (cows milk) that is meant for calfs, food that will make them grow into a huge animal, and pass anti-bodies and nutrients to the calf.

Who really knows wat thats doing to our adult bodies when we take food meant for a huge animal consumed by a smaller animal. For all we know it could be responsible for growth disorders or cancer. there could be links we are totally unaware of.

I hate how milk and bread have places on the food pyramid. I suspect they were put there to promote their respective industries, but humans must be able to live without them. humans didnt always know how to milk animals and bake bread.

i don't think dairy has anything to do with male pattern baldness, but its possible. I do however think its a unnatural thing to be doing and possibly may effect the body somehow.

 

[global]

During the 1930's, Dr. Francis M. Pottenger conducted a 10-year study on the relative effects of pasteurized and raw milk diets on 900 cats. One group received nothing but raw whole milk, while the other was fed nothing but pasteurized whole milk from the same source.
The raw milk group thrived, remaining healthy, active and alert throughout their lives, but the group fed on pasteurized milk soon became listless, confused and highly vulnerable to a host of chronic degenerative ailments normally associated with humans, including heart disease, kidney failure, thyroid dysfunction, respiratory ailments, loss of teeth, brittle bones, liver inflammation, etc.

But what caught Dr. Pottenger's attention most was what happened to the second and third generations.

The first offspring of the pasteurized milk group were all born with poor teeth and small, weak bones- a clear cut sign of calcium deficiency, which indicated lack of calcium absorption from pasteurized milk.

The offspring of the raw milk group remained as healthy as their parents.
Many of the kittens in third generation of the pasteurized group were stillborn, while those that survived were all sterile and unable to reproduce.

The experiment had to end there because there was no fourth generation of cats fed on pasteurized milk, although the raw milk group continued to breed and thrive indefinitely.
If that is insufficient proof of the ill effects of pasteurized milk, take note of the fact even that newborn calves fed on pasteurized milk taken from their own mother cows usually die within six months, a fact which the commercial dairy industry is loathe to admit.
Despite such scientific evidence in favor of raw milk and against pasteurized milk, and despite the fact that until the early twentieth century the human species thrived on raw milk, it is actually illegal to sell raw milk to consumers in all but a few states in America today.

It is far more profitable to the dairy industry to pasteurize milk to extend its shelf-life, though such denatured milk does nothing whatsoever to extend human life.
Furthermore, pasteurization renders milk from sick cows in unsanitary dairies relatively 'harmless' by killing some, but not all, dangerous germs, and this too cuts costs for the dairy industry.

It required only three generations for Dr. Pottenger's pasteurized milk fed cats to become sterile and enfeebled. That's about how many generations of Americans and Europeans have fed on pasteurized milk. Today, infertility has become a major problem for your American couples, while calcium deficiency has become so rampant that over 90 percent of all American children suffer chronic tooth decay.

LOOK AT THE INCREDIBLE POWER OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY ON CONGRESS.

Total rubbish

 

[freakout]

Total rubbish

Got it. Cat's can't synthesize taurine. Thanks!

Too bad it took them many decades to find out and another few decades to add it into powdered milk.

As for me, I suffered from diarrhea from powdered milk as a baby. My mom stopped producing milk in just six months. It was raw goat's milk that saved me. Maybe the reason why I think like a goat

 

[moseymoose]

Put a saucer of cow's milk down on the ground in front of a cat or a dog, and watch what happens!

The point, of course, is that other animals would drink it into adulthood, if they had it available to them.

yes, but should they? yes a cat or dog loves to drink milk, but its not like its their nature to suck on the tit of another animal. They only drink it because we give it to them

I've always thought its weird. Milk is the food we provide for our young before they can get food for themselves. Humans naturally drink breast milk for a little while then progress to other food.

think about it. As adults we r drinking the food (cows milk) that is meant for calfs, food that will make them grow into a huge animal, and pass anti-bodies and nutrients to the calf.

Who really knows wat thats doing to our adult bodies when we take food meant for a huge animal consumed by a smaller animal. For all we know it could be responsible for growth disorders or cancer. there could be links we are totally unaware of.

I hate how milk and bread have places on the food pyramid. I suspect they were put there to promote their respective industries, but humans must be able to live without them. humans didnt always know how to milk animals and bake bread.

i don't think dairy has anything to do with male pattern baldness, but its possible. I do however think its a unnatural thing to be doing and possibly may effect the body somehow.

I don't really know what you are getting at with the whole, from another animal stuff whatsoever. These ideas are a little... radical?

 

[moseymoose]

anyway, you can't seriously think that just by not eating/drinking dairy will help with hairloss. I'm no expert, in fact I haven't a clue but It's not going to effect the dht enough to make a difference. You don't see guys complaining they have thin hair because they drank a lot of milk or yogurt for a long period of time :shakehead: .

 

[dpdr]

Milk = Poison

 

[Cassin]

Milk = Poison

Almond Milk!!!

 

[Bryan]

Put a saucer of cow's milk down on the ground in front of a cat or a dog, and watch what happens!

The point, of course, is that other animals would drink it into adulthood, if they had it available to them.

yes, but should they?

Sure, why not? Milk is a very nutritious food, and has some very important vitamins and minerals; perhaps more importantly, its protein is very high quality; if I remember correctly, milk protein is second only to egg protein in quality.

yes a cat or dog loves to drink milk, but its not like its their nature to suck on the tit of another animal. They only drink it because we give it to them

Yes, and there's a whole bunch of other things that are "not in my nature" that have to do with other things that I eat, too; just as one example, it's "not in my nature" to jump off a boat and go swimming down deep in the ocean just to find sardines to eat, but I _do_ pay other people to do it for me, because I also think sardines are tasty and nutritious for me, just like milk. There are plenty of other things having to do with food preparation that aren't "in my nature", either, but I still do them (or pay other people to do them), because that's how we humans have to eat.

I've always thought its weird. Milk is the food we provide for our young before they can get food for themselves. Humans naturally drink breast milk for a little while then progress to other food.

I strongly recommend that you devote less philosophy to your food choices, and more science and nutrition.

think about it. As adults we r drinking the food (cows milk) that is meant for calfs, food that will make them grow into a huge animal, and pass anti-bodies and nutrients to the calf.

Oh, you think that it's the milk that makes them grow into huge adult animals, and not their genetics? :laugh: Is the same true for all other large animals, too, like bears and whales?

Who really knows wat thats doing to our adult bodies when we take food meant for a huge animal consumed by a smaller animal. For all we know it could be responsible for growth disorders or cancer. there could be links we are totally unaware of.

Or maybe it'll just improve their overall health! Have you read the book Nutrition Against Disease, by the famous biochemist Dr. Roger Williams? He says in it (in a part of the book devoted to popular myths and fallacies about drinking milk) that all scientists who are used to working with laboratory animals know that including some milk in the diets of those animals will always improve their health.

i don't think dairy has anything to do with male pattern baldness, but its possible. I do however think its a unnatural thing to be doing and possibly may effect the body somehow.

Like I said before, I suggest you spend less time worrying about what you think is "natural" or "unnatural" to eat, and worry more about the nutrition of what it is you're eating.

 

[freakout]

1. Estrogen: one of the risk factors in milk for prostate cancer. Qin LQ, Wang PY, Kaneko T, Hoshi K, Sato A

2. Protective effect of tea on the cardiovascular system is totally wiped out when milk is added. Charite Hospital, Berlin, Germany

Prostate cancer has been associated with male pattern baldness.
This (2) is also true in chocolate which is why 'dark chocolate' bars (milkless) became popular.

Studies like these may or may not mean much. But it's surely something to think about.

 

[dpdr]

This subject is for misterE

 

[merkur]

I tend to agree with the science behind the journals linked. Having a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_cattle clearly points out how hormones have become the driving force behind milk production and its increasing dependence to sustain the high demand of dairy in our society.

Historically, there was little distinction between dairy cattle and beef cattle, with the same stock often being used for both meat and milk production. Today, the bovine industry is more specialized and most dairy cattle have been bred to produce large volumes of milk. The United States dairy herd produced 83.9 billion kg (185 billion lbs) of milk in 2007, up from 52.6 billion kg (116 billion lbs) in 1950.,[1][2] Yet there are more than 9 million cows on U.S. dairy farms—about 13 million fewer than there were in 1950.[2]

A bit odd that we have ~ 13 MILLION FEWER dairy cows now than ~ 50 years ago. So less cows somehow manage to produce ~ 63% more milk... Makes perfectly logical sense :whistle:

It would be interesting to know if other cultures where raw natural goat milk is consumed experience the same level of hair loss as western society (or naturally bred cows that are not genetically engineered for mass milk production).

It is fact that people have allergies to milk (not to confuse with lactose intolerance) and years of consumption probably have severe strain on the body. Irregular hormones and increased inflammation in the body, yup sounds like a good chance we bring this on ourselfs and its not so clear cut as people think (family history of hair loss, more like family history of dairy sensitivity and poor nutritional choices). http://kidshealth.org/teen/food_fitness/nutrition/milk_allergy.html

I'm not one to get all wild about conspiracy theories, etc but it does seem that we humans do have a tendency to be dumb. Of course we eat poorly or consume food that clearly doesn't agree with us, no problem we have meds to help counter those nasty effects. The pharma industry thrives on our inability to get out of our own way. Do you think Merck has investments in the dairy/cattle industry? Maybe. Of course it would make sense to do more walking or biking to work rather than commute by subway or bus or car but the auto industry would hate that, as well as the oil industry... etc etc. More time walking and biking would take away from our time to watch youtube videos and update our status on facebook from our smart phones. We know the telecom industry would think highly of us not using or consuming data on our monthly phone plans. Its a vicious cycle we put ourself through folks. Thats my conspiracy quota for the year I promise

As a side note, I don't agree with statements about cats and dogs drinking cows milk and deriving logic that since that is an example of different species ingesting another species milk that its rational that we do the same. We provide them the opportunity to have it, in nature they would not. Same as someone giving them coconut milk or rice milk, soy milk or beer. Come on people, use your brains before posting dumb replies. It hurts to see people lose credibility that some of you have worked hard to earn around here...

 

[DarkDays]

Cat's will drink milk, yes, but at the same time they will develop diarrhea and very loose bowel movements, so if you are a cat owner I'd not feed your cat too much milk.

The truth is, there is a lot of "good" stuff in milk, but the question remains: What about the rest? The question would be whether the benefits outweigh the negative stuff or not.

For those who've had cancer will most likely gotten an order from their doctor to not drink any milk as that can worsen the condition due to the growth hormones in milk.

 

[Bryan]

Cat's will drink milk, yes, but at the same time they will develop diarrhea and very loose bowel movements, so if you are a cat owner I'd not feed your cat too much milk.

Cats and dogs apparently have similar problems with lactose intolerance as humans.

The truth is, there is a lot of "good" stuff in milk, but the question remains: What about the rest? The question would be whether the benefits outweigh the negative stuff or not.

If the net effect of giving milk to laboratory animals is to improve their health, the benefits must apparently outweigh the "negative stuff".