The world of food allergies is quickly becoming a more encompassing world. And Milk allergy is at the top of the list, rising to that position within the last 10 years. Here is an interesting article that explores the introduction of rBGH in the 1990’s in the form of vaccines given to cows to increase their milk supply and the political and health impacts that this action has had.
My own child is unable to consume pasteurized milk and will break out in hives that she will scratch until she bleeds. All though she does better on Organic milk than regular milk she still gets hives. She tolerates raw milk just fine however. There has also been concern that these extra hormones in the milk are leading to earlier puberty, obesity, cancer, yeast infections, and breast buds in boys among other suspected results. It is important to note that the use of rBGH (rBST) does not improve the quality of milk, only the quantity. By the way, unless your milk specifically says on the label that it doesn’t contain rBGH or rBST than it most likely does.
Other posts about raw (unpasteurized) milk:
This article was taken from AllergyKids.com.
Got Milk Allergy? What the Labels (and Docs!) Don’t Tell Us
According to CNN and a recent study published in the Journal of Allergy and Immunology, milk allergy is the most common food allergy, having established itself in the number one position in the last ten years.
Interestingly, a new protein was introduced into the American milk supply just over ten years ago. Children with a milk allergy are allergic to the proteins found in milk.
Are these recently introduced proteins responsible for the milk allergy epidemic? You decide.
What the leading pediatric allergists (funded by Big Food and Big Pharma) failed to tell us…
In the early 1990s, one of the world’s largest chemical companies, in conjunction with a global pharmaceutical corporation, invented a vaccine that could be injected into cows to increase their milk production.
This vaccine contained a new protein that was designed to manipulate the hormones of cows in order to force them to produce more milk. More milk out of cows meant more money for the corporations, so their concept was a hit.
The only snag was that the vaccine that they were injecting into the cows contained a manipulated protein engineered to be a growth hormone. Because of the hormonal disruption that this protein created, increasing evidence showed that this manipulated protein was proving to cause breast, colon and prostate cancer . Mounting evidence also showed that cows injected with this protein showed increases in infertility, birth defects and fetal loss.
Because of these health consequences, government agencies around the world decided NOT to allow this manipulated protein and growth hormone into their milk and beef supplies. In the US, however, it was a different story.
In order to ensure passage through the FDA, the corporation who stood to profit from this cow vaccine, employed a strategy of placing their employees in critical decision making positions by essentially creating a revolving door between their corporation and the FDA.
For example, at this corporation, a Ph.D. named Margret Miller assisted in the development of this manipulated growth hormone. When it came time for the FDA to approve this hormone, Ms. Miller jumped ship to join the FDA and take a role in its scientific and safety evaluations!
Given Ms. Miller’s success at playing both sides of the field, Michael Taylor, an attorney at this same corporation, became a lobbyist and drafted guidelines that exempted milk producers from labeling dairy products from cows that had been treated with rBGH.
The revolving door strategy became so successful that this corporation continued to staff regulatory, scientific and positions of influence from both sides of the aisle right up to the Supreme Court where they placed their former attorney, Clarence Thomas, who provided legal clout in the manipulation of America’s food supply.
As a result, in 1993, this genetically manipulated milk protein, rBGH, was controversially approved and allowed to enter the American food supply – in the form of milk, cheese, yogurt and beef. Today, 1 in 8 women has breast cancer, 1 in 6 men has prostate cancer, and milk allergy is the most common food allergy in children.
Has the financial relationship that leading pediatric allergists have with this chemical corporation affected their ability to fully disclose the risks presented by the introduction of this protein in 1993?
To learn more about What’s In Your Milk? , there are three things that you can do right away!
Buy milk, cheese and yogurt that is labeled “rBGH-free”
Purchase beef that is also labeled “rBGH-free”
Signs of a milk allergy may include but are not limited to:
Stomach aches, colic, gastrointestinal discomfort
Allergic Shiners (dark circles beneath the eyes)
Eczema, rashes and skin disorders (including acne)
Migraines, headaches and other neurological symptoms
As well as the classic allergic symptoms like hives, swelling, difficulty breathing and possible anaphylaxis (as detailed at www.allergykids.com)
According to a November 2007 report from the FDA, the FDA “does not have the capacity to ensure the safety of the nation’s food supply” putting “American lives at risk.”
So stay smart, stay savvy…and keep asking questions! In a system that is failing our children, mothers can’t! There is so much that you can do to protect the health of your family! Learn more at www.allergykids.com
NOTE: One of the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies assisted in the development of the controversial rBGH vaccine.
According to Congress, a provision was added to the Homeland Security Act just prior to passage that shields the pharmaceutical industry from billions of dollars of anticipated lawsuits over vaccines, removing liability for any injuries that may result from vaccines they manufacture.
The provision was added so late that most members of Congress were not even aware that it had been added to the 470-plus page bill. And it was so similar to a defeated vaccine bill from 2002 that an aide even commented that the provision was actually in a different font than the rest of the Homeland Security Act, as if someone had cut and pasted it into the new bill.
Despite concerns over vaccines’ toxicity, allergenic risks and the 100,000,000 DNA fragments that each vaccine is allowed to contain, the FDA lacks funding and does not conduct independent tests to assess the safety of these vaccines, relying on industry-funded research conducted by the pharmaceutical and chemical corporations themselves.