Food

Saturday, July 4, 2009

Related Topics:

Got milk? Navigate the choices with this helpful buyer’s guide

With its balanced mix of carbs and protein and rich supply of calcium and other bone-strengthening nutrients, (cow’s) milk certainly does a body good. But with so many choices on grocers’ shelves, how do you know which one you should buy? EatingWell helps you cut through the confusion with this guide.

Whole, reduced-fat, low-fat or nonfat?

Consider whole milk—which delivers 150 calories and 8 grams fat (5 grams saturated) per cup—a once-in-a-while treat. Nutrition experts recommend drinking low-fat (1%) milk (100 calories, 2.5 grams fat) or nonfat milk (80 calories, 0.5 grams fat) to limit intake of the saturated fats that boost risk of heart disease*. Don’t be fooled: reduced-fat (2%) milk is not a low-fat food. One cup has 5 grams fat, 3 of them the saturated kind. You won’t miss out on milk’s nutritional boons when you opt for low-fat or nonfat milk (sometimes called “skim”): per cup, all varieties deliver about one-third of the recommended daily value for calcium and at least 20 percent of the daily value for riboflavin, phosphorus and vitamin D.
*Infants under age 2, who need extra fat to support a developing brain, should drink whole milk.

Organic or not?

According to The Nielsen Company, sales of organic milk jumped from $550 million in 2003 to almost $900 million in the first quarter of 2007. Polls suggest people associate organic milk with superior nutrition, better treatment of animals and a healthier planet. But there’s no evidence that organic milk is more nutritious. While preliminary research has suggested that grass-fed cows produce milk with more vitamin E and omega-3 fats than cows fed grains, organic standards don’t require that cows be solely grass-fed. (Farmers must use organic fertilizers and pesticides and may not give cows preventive antibiotics or supplemental growth hormones; animals must also get some time outdoors.)

Lactose-free?

This type of milk is basically regular cow’s milk minus lactose, the natural sugar in milk. It provides all of the same healthful nutrients (e.g., protein and calcium), just not the sugar that stokes digestive problems for up to 50 million Americans.

Raw vs. pasteurized?

During pasteurization, milk is heated to high temperatures (>161°F) then rapidly cooled to kill harmful bacteria, including salmonella, E.coli 0157:H7 and listeria. While raw-milk enthusiasts claim heating milk destroys its natural enzymes and beneficial bacteria, studies show that the nutritional differences between pasteurized and raw milk are slight. What’s more, public health experts warn that drinking raw milk is like playing Russian roulette. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that raw milk accounted for 1,007 illnesses and two deaths between 1998 and 2005.

RBST-free or not?

The claim “rbST-free” indicates milk produced without using the artificial growth hormone recombinant bovine somatotropin, or rbST. Giving this hormone to a cow boosts its milk production by about five quarts per day. Some consumers believe that treating cows with the supplemental hormone is inhumane, but the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains that treating cows with rbST does not harm the animals—or significantly affect the hormone content of milk. In fact, all milks—even from cows not treated with rbST—contain hormones. Note: All organic milks are rbST-free, but not all rbST-free milks are organic (i.e., farmers may use pesticides, fertilizers, etc.).

Some people swear milk tastes better in pretty glass bottles, but it’s best stored in opaque containers to help prevent milk’s riboflavin—an extremely light-sensitive B vitamin—from breaking down.

By Amy Paturel for EatingWell Magazine

Amy Paturel, M.S., M.P.H., is a freelance writer in Seal Beach, California. In addition to EatingWell, her work frequently appears in Cooking Light, Health, Women’s Health and Wine Enthusiast.

Related Links from EatingWell:

Syndication:

From the Community…

Comments 1-10 of 37
  • margaritad's Avatar
    Posted by margaritad Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:49pm PDT

    How about soy milk? Today i made home made soy milk and it was better then the store, tasting better then the cow milk, or lactose free milk.

    in other words, i costumized it they way i wanted, the flavor i like, and it was the most healthy thing i did in my life.

    You guys should tried.

    Thanks,

    La Perla

    Report Abuse
  • Christina R's Avatar
    Posted by Christina R Sun Jun 29, 2008 6:26am PDT

    I'm surprised soy milk wasn't talked about, too.

    Anyway, I actually read that nonfat and 1% milk doesn't contain the amount of fat necessary to drink in combination with the calcium. In other words, for your body to optimally utilize the calcium, a certain amount of fat must be eaten alongside the milk. I guess if you're drinking your milk with a meal, you'd be fine, but not with your cereal or smoothie. For this reason, I drink organic 2% milk.

    Report Abuse
  • azn gurl 101's Avatar
    Posted by azn gurl 101 Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:14am PDT

    wow i am surprised I thought 2 percent was healthy for you, but it has saturated fats in it oh my...

    Report Abuse
  • Sew Flake's Avatar
    Posted by Sew Flake Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:07am PDT

    I needed to read this. I was just givign my son whole milk. Then the doc told me to give him skim milk, it bubbles all up in his bottles so I quit using that and started using the 1% milk and it seems to be doing fine. The skim was giving him huge belches hahaha .....

    Report Abuse
  • Selina's Avatar
    Posted by Selina Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:18am PDT

    Thanx 4 posting something about the Lactose-free milk. I just found out I was lactose intolerant and after spending over $200 trying to find a soy milk that wasn't too gross (which I didn't)I found a lactose free milk. I heard about how good for you soy milk was...weird u didn't talk about it...but wasn't sure if no lactose meant no nutrients...thanks.

    Nina

    Report Abuse
  • Jen H's Avatar
    Posted by Jen H Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:45am PDT

    Organic and hormone free milk may not contain more nutritional value but the hormones contained in other milk can have severe effects on womnes health, particularly young girls during and right before puberty. Also soy, although good for you, contains alot of estrogen. If your prone to hormonal issues or PMS you may want to steer clear.

    Report Abuse
  • alison_ny's Avatar
    Posted by alison_ny Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:42am PDT

    regarding all the choices, why dont we see out there more earth-friendly packaging? the tetrabrik with plastic, aluminum foil and paper, are recyclable but still polluting

    Report Abuse
  • Suzanne's Avatar
    Posted by Suzanne Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:50am PDT

    I buy organic milk for three reasons: I like the idea of possibly having less hormones and junk in my milk, I want to do whatever I can to encourage ethcial treatment of animals, and the number one reason is that the milk lasts a long longer than regular. I've kept organic milk in my fridge for 3 weeks without it spoiling at all. Regular milk seems to turn just incredibly fast.

    Report Abuse
  • astrid1111_2001's Avatar
    Posted by astrid1111_2001 Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:06am PDT

    Are you freaking kidding me! The rbST hormone is definitely bad for cows and bad for people, especially young girls. Before hormone treated cows girls at the youngest started going through puberty at the age of 12 & 13. By today’s standards however that's pretty old. Children are served regular hormone ridden milk at schools, and are developing their periods, and breasts around 7 and 8 years old. Which in turn means that girls are also becoming more sexually active at younger ages like 11 and 12 years old.

    The hormone rbHT doesn't just magically make the cows produce more milk, it makes them stay in their milk producing phase longer which throws off the balance of their cycle and I would consider that unhealthy. Not to mention Have you seen the utters of cows that are milked longer then usual, granted normal milking with machines also doesn't look pleasant, but why prolong the torture. Basically how much blood do you want in your milk? Cows have also produced deformities to state of not being able to walk or stand properly. Farmers that use rbHT are not going to admit that the hormone has bad side affects, to them the cows are a product, and if they are producing want they want then to them their is no problem. Not that it matters much but rbHT was never FDA approved, an independent company went around to these farmer and sold them the hormone, promising higher profits because the cows would produce more milk.

    Organic anything is better, not perfect by any means, but better than not organic. FDA standards for organic just mean a low percentage of pesticides, no hormones, and the product hasn't been genetically modified, (no GM, GMO free). With all the salmonella breakouts the last two years I think it is pretty irresponsible for a web page like this to basically promote rbHT and dismiss organic products so easily. If people really want to drink milk that is good for them and, doesn't hurt cows, then they shouldn't drink cow milk at all. There are plenty of other milks available. If you don't want to drink plant-based milk, go for goat milk, and goat milk products. Cows are one of, if not the worst thing for our planet. We over breed them, and cut down forests for them, they produce more methane gas then cars do, and they ruin the land they gaze on, the ground that a cow grazes on becomes infertile for about 10-12 years, and usually becomes desert. Goats unlike cows do not cause any of these problems, and are usually good for the land they graze on.

    Besides that, soy and rice milk are good alternatives, just make sure you also buy these products organic, and vitamin enriched, because it's not like cows are the only things we mess with. Soybeans and rice products are also very pesticide, hormone, GMO ridden, since these products are the stables of so many diets, first world governments and corporations feel they must somehow produce the best super soybean and rice grain for every occasion no matter the cost. If you think I'm being over dramatic I suggest you check out, "The Corporation", and "The Future of Food", these are two very informative documentaries.

    Report Abuse
  • Aurora's Avatar
    Posted by Aurora Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:52pm PDT

    sorry to astrid:

    but this statement is of ignorance: "Before hormone treated cows girls at the youngest started going through puberty at the age of 12 & 13. By today’s standards however that's pretty old. Children are served regular hormone ridden milk at schools, and are developing their periods, and breasts around 7 and 8 years old. Which in turn means that girls are also becoming more sexually active at younger ages like 11 and 12 years old."

    there are minute amounts of hormones in milk no matter what, b/c it is a female cow, weather hormones are added or not to the cow. the amount of hormones the ends up in the milk from a cow that has been treated with it, is sooo minute that it would be physically impossible to drink enough milk to equal enough the amount of ONE birth control pill! therefore it wouldn't have any effect on children or anyone else. the real reason why children are devolving early is b/c of the oversexed media. children being exposed to sexual content at earlier and earlier ages, weather its the tv or music or the clothing, sends signals to their brain in order to start to "get them ready" to become an adult.

    Report Abuse
Comments 1-10 of 37

leave your comment

You must sign in to post a comment

Sign In for personalized information

New User? Sign Up

Updates Chatter on Shine...

food byte

Summer is hot, ice cream is glorious, and those with a sweet tooth know exactly where to find their favorite summertime treat. These unbeatable ice-cream shops serve up delectable scoops that will keep you coming back for more well beyond the end of summer.