Raw Milk and Lactose Intolerance

People choose to drink raw milk for many different reasons. Some are seeking to support local farms and connect with the places from which their food originates.  Others want to make sure that animal welfare is a high priority in the production of their food. Some people choose raw milk for its delicious, rich flavor.  And still others seek out raw milk in order to address specific health conditions, such as asthma, allergies, and eczema.

Lactose intolerance and maldigestion of pasteurized milk are significant factors for many people who choose raw milk. Nonetheless, when researching the peer-reviewed literature, many would conclude that raw milk cannot help with lactose intolerance. Raw milk detractors often cite a study by Stanford University in their assertion that raw milk does not help with lactose intolerance. However, many people who have been diagnosed as “lactose intolerant” have reported that they can actually drink raw milk with no digestive problems. Let’s dig deep into all of this to better understand the disconnect.

The Stanford Study

The Stanford study, titled “Effect of Raw Milk on Lactose Intolerance: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study,” assessed the effects of raw milk, pasteurized milk, and soy milk in 16 adults. The people participating in this study were confirmed to have “true lactose malabsorption” through the use of a Hydrogen Breath Test (HBT). Over a course of several weeks, the participants in the study consumed successively greater amounts of raw milk, pasteurized milk, and soy milk in an 8-day milk phase for each type of milk as shown in the figure below.  This study found that there was no improvement in lactose intolerance symptoms with the consumption of raw milk compared to pasteurized milk.

Milk dosage protocol and outcome measures for each 8-day milk phase: full amount of milk was consumed in 1 sitting on each day. Mummah, et al 2014.

Although the Stanford study has often been cited as proving that raw milk does not help with lactose intolerance, there are some significant problems with this study. The sample size of 16 participants is quite small, and this makes is very difficult to make any sweeping conclusions based on the results of the study.  The sample size becomes even more problematic when it is considered that 383 people initially signed up to participate in the study.

The 383 people who volunteered for this study considered themselves to be lactose intolerant. This means that they had experienced digestive symptoms such as diarrhea, abdominal cramping, audible bowel sounds, and/or flatulence as a result of consuming milk products. However, only 27 people were qualified to participate through the use of the Hydrogen Breath Test. Of these 27 people, 16 people chose to participate in the study. Out of the initial group of 383 volunteer participants, only 4% actually participated in the study. This means that 96% of the original volunteers were excluded from this study!

This calls into question the use of the Hydrogen Breath Test as an appropriate measure of lactose intolerance.  Although the HBT is used to characterize the clinical definition of lactose malabsorption, it is clearly not a sufficient test for identifying people who experience digestive symptoms as a result of consuming milk products. The study even mentioned that, “Many people with lactose malabsorption [as diagnosed through results of the HBT] do not report clinical lactose intolerance. Conversely, many individuals with perceived lactose intolerance do not experience malabsorption [as confirmed with HBT].” The Hydrogen Breath Test is clearly not a sufficient test for identifying people who experience digestive symptoms from the consumption of milk products.

Another significant problem with the Stanford study is that the length of the 8-day milk phases may have been too short.  Specifically, the study authors found that “the reduced H2 production observed for raw milk on day 8 vs day 1 suggests a degree of adaptation to raw milk… In contrast to raw milk, no adaptation was observed for pasteurized milk.” The participants had decreased levels of hydrogen in the HBT by the end of the 8-day raw milk phase, and this finding warrants further study to determine whether this trend would have continued over a longer period of time and resulted in a reduction of lactose intolerance symptoms.

Mummah, et al 2014

Overall, the Stanford study fell far short of actually answering the question of whether raw milk can be well-tolerated by people who describe themselves as “lactose-intolerant.” 96% of the volunteers who considered themselves to be lactose intolerant were excluded from this study. Furthermore, the study did not continue long enough to determine if the positive trend in hydrogen production from drinking raw milk would have continued and resulted in reduction of lactose intolerance symptoms.

First-Hand Accounts About Raw Milk and Lactose Intolerance

There have been numerous first-hand reports of improvements in lactose intolerance from the consumption of raw milk. For instance, lactose intolerance runs in my husband's family, coming through his father.  My husband and his siblings all developed digestive problems from consuming milk and other dairy products at around 18-20 years old. Prior to trying raw milk, my husband could only tolerate pasteurized milk products if he took lactase enzyme pills whenever he consumed dairy. However, my husband has been able to drink raw milk in moderate amounts (such as 1-2 glasses per day) with no problems, and raw milk consumption also corresponded with an increased ability to tolerate pasteurized dairy in cheese and ice cream.  My father-in-law was also able to consume raw milk without digestive problems and reported that it also increased his ability to consume pasteurized cheese and ice cream.  

Here are a few more first-hand accounts about raw milk consumption and lactose intolerance.

“I am lactose intolerant. I was diagnosed around the age of 12. I missed so much school due to upset stomach & went off of dairy fully for over 10 years. I can drink raw milk with no issues - I can have cups of it with no bad side effects. In fact - I can even have pasteurized dairy now with little to no problems. It has helped my gut health so much - I notice when I don’t consume it because my digestion gets weird.

“When I first started drinking it I was terrified but after the first cup my body craved it for the first month. It was all I wanted. I could have easily drank half a gallon a day if I didn’t limit myself. That’s tapered off now though.”       ~Bethanie N.

“I had IBS and had to take everything out of my diet and slowly add things back in to see what was bothering me. It was processed dairy. Found raw dairy and now that's all I consume most days. Raw milk, cheese, yogurt, butter. IBS gone, hemorrhoids gone, arthritis gone, inflammation gone, sinus problems gone. Feel like a new woman.” ~Patricia W.

“My kids were all lactose intolerant, but when I switched to raw A2, they all saw a huge difference in response. No more issues. One of my kiddos was at the point of needing her tonsils removed, but they shrunk down to normal size, and her sleep apnea went away.” ~mother of four children

Surveys About Raw Milk and Lactose Intolerance

There have been several raw milk surveys which collected data about lactose intolerance. In a 2007 survey of Michigan raw milk drinkers, 155 people participating in the survey had been diagnosed with lactose intolerance by a healthcare professional. Out of these 155 people, 118 reported that they did not have lactose intolerance symptoms from consuming raw milk.  Thus, 76% of the survey respondents who had been diagnosed with lactose intolerance were able to consume raw milk with no digestive issues.

In a 2011 survey of 56 Michigan raw milk drinkers, “eleven individuals claimed that they experienced symptoms of lactose intolerance when drinking processed milks but had no ill side effects from drinking raw milk.”

In a 2014 survey of 153 Maryland raw milk drinkers, “Fifty-nine respondents claimed no discomfort after drinking raw milk but discomfort from drinking pasteurized milk.

Raw Milk and Lactase

Pasteurization inactivates enzymes and also denatures proteins, and consequently pasteurized milk induces digestive discomfort in many people. Lactase is the enzyme responsible for breaking down lactose into digestible form. Raw milk facilitates the production of lactase enzyme in the intestinal tract, and thus it makes sense that so many people have reported improvements in lactose intolerance from drinking raw milk.

Ancient populations who relied on dairy products adapted over time by developing lactase persistence genes. These genes allow people to digest lactose into adulthood, and they have been found in various indigenous populations in Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Overall, around 35% of adults worldwide have lactase persistence genes.

Although it has been widely argued that only people who have lactase persistence genes can consume milk, there are currently many populations around the globe who subsist largely on dairy yet who do not have lactase persistence genes.  For instance, despite the fact that an estimated 95% of Mongolians do not have the lactase persistence gene, their diet relies very heavily on raw milk, cheese, and other milk products.

Furthermore, archaeological evidence shows that humans were consuming raw milk for thousands of years before the widespread appearance of the lactase-persistence gene. Raw milk allowed humans to thrive in conditions where survival would have been difficult. Scientists now believe that lactase-persistence genes were spread through natural selection. This means that the reproductive capacity and/or survivability of ancient raw milk drinkers was substantially increased compared to non-milk-drinking populations.

Large Body of Evidence for Raw Milk and Lactose Intolerance Benefits

First-hand accounts and surveys show that there are many people whose lactose intolerance symptoms are improved by drinking raw milk. Additionally, many worldwide raw milk-drinking populations do not have lactase persistence genes. Furthermore, the archaeological record shows that humans were consuming raw milk for thousands of years before the appearance of lactase persistence genes. This large body of evidence cannot be negated by one small study. The Stanford study should clearly not be seen as the final word on raw milk and lactose intolerance.

NOW AVAILABLE! RAWMI Risk Management Training Video Series

The Raw Milk Institute (RAWMI) has trained hundreds of farmers through in-person workshops around the USA and Canada.  Although our training is typically only taught in-person, the recent travel challenges led to us teaching this course via Zoom.  So now we are able to share this training with all of you!

RAWMI’s Risk Management Training Workshop is now available to watch on Vimeo here:

About the Training

This RAWMI training focuses on:

• benefits of raw milk,

• grass-to-glass identification of risks,

• development of a risk management plan, and

• lessons learned from other raw milk dairies.

It includes lots of practical tips for the production of safe raw milk. This training has been shown to reduce outbreaks and illnesses, increase safety, and lower insurance costs.

Links to Specific Segments

The overall training course is 4&1/2 hours long, but we have broken that down into 17 smaller segments so that you can easily find the sections you want to watch.  

WORKSHOP OVERVIEW: 

PART 1 – Introductions and About Raw Milk Institute  

PART 2 – Raw Milk History and Opposition 

PART 3 – Raw Milk Benefits 

PART 4 – Raw Milk Risks and RAWMI Method 

PART 5 – Introduction to Grass-to-Glass Risk Management   

PART 6 – Small-Scale and Large-Scale Raw Milk Production 

PART 7 – Risk Minimization: Grass, Pasture, and Water 

PART 8 – Risk Minimization: Animal Health and Biosecurity 

PART 9 – Risk Minimization: Milking and Udder Prep 

PART 10 – Risk Minimization: Management 

PART 11 – Q&A for Parts 1-10 

PART 12 – Risk Minimization: Management (cont.) 

PART 13 – Risk Minimization: Management (cont.) 

PART 14 – Risk Minimization: Glass, Bottling, and Inspections 

PART 15 – Raw Milk Testing 

PART16 – Why to Become RAWMI LISTED 

PART 17 – Conclusion and Final Q&A

What Attendees Have Said

Here is some of the feedback we received from attendees at this training: 

“Excellent presentation that every single person who dairies for themselves and their family should take and learn from. Thank you very much.”

“This has been excellent!  ONLINE was so helpful as it’s hard to travel and be away.”

“For me, the combination of technical information and anecdotes is very effective for explaining why the RAWMI methods are important and how they solve a raw milk producer challenges. I came away with practical solutions to increase the quality/value of our milk and farm. Thank you." 

“I left the Zoom meeting with a very clear understanding of what we are doing right and where we need to make changes. Beyond that, though, I left inspired to pursue excellence and cast a clear vision to everyone who is joining me in this endeavor.”  

“The information was also rich and informative. I learned a ton and the systematic way you presented it was easy to follow and comprehensive.” 

“I cannot wait to move forward with you in becoming RAWMI Listed. We will be making some changes as we form our RAMP plan. We have already adjusted our milk chilling and have seen an improvement in flavor and longevity.”  

“Thank you for all you do. I have no doubt history will look back at the RAWMI as having played a crucial role in reforming raw milk production, health, and nutrition.”

Remembering the Walker-Gordon Dairy, an Innovator in Safe Raw Milk from 1897-1971

Did you know that the science of producing safe raw milk was flourishing way back in the late 1800’s?  Read on for an interview with Dr Edward Tindall DVM, who worked at the Walker-Gordon Certified Raw Milk dairy in New Jersey.

Aerial view of Walker Gordon Laboratories and Dairy in Plainsboro, New Jersey.

Certified Medical Milk

Humans have had a long and successful history with raw milk for at least 10,000 years. Ancient peoples who consumed milk had a competitive advantage over those that did not have a steady source of readily available food, such that the reproductive capacity and/or survivability of ancient raw milk drinkers was substantially increased compared to non-milk-drinking populations.

After numerous millennia flourishing with raw milk, mankind’s relationship with raw milk took a wrong turn. By the mid-1800’s in America, some raw milk production had shifted away from farms and into highly-populated cities. Big cities did not have pastures or clean water, and the cows in city dairies were kept in filthy conditions with poor nutrition and poor animal health. Many of these cows were fed byproducts from alcohol distilleries, leading to illness in the cows. Raw milk had become a source of deadly diseases such as tuberculosis, typhoid, diphtheria, and scarlet fever. 

In the late 1800's, it was recognized that raw milk being produced in these conditions was dangerous, and two solutions were proposed.  Pasteurization was ushered in to address filthy conditions and unhealthy cows in cities.  It answered the question of how to commercialize dirty milk, rather than spending the time and energy it would take to produce clean milk from healthy cows. The other solution was to actually produce the milk in hygienic conditions with healthy animals.  

It was known that raw milk was a superior source of nutrition for infants and children, so the American Association of Medical Milk Commissions (AAMMC) was established in the late 1800's by Dr Henry Coit to ensure a supply of safe raw milk. The AAMMC was in operation for nearly a century, certifying medical raw milk for use in hospitals and for feeding infants and children.  

“The requirements of the New York Commission at that time were: ‘That the milk should contain 4 to 4.5 percent fat; that it should be free from pathogenic germs; and that the total number of bacteria should not be excessive. The milk was to be delivered in bottles and not over 24 hours old. It should be from healthy cows.”

~Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind

Walker Gordon’s Rotolactor in operation. School buses, tour buses, and families accounted for approximately 250,000 visitors annually.

Walker-Gordon Dairy and Dr Edward Tindall DVM

The Walker-Gordon dairy farm was a preeminent source of Certified Raw Milk for over 70 years.  Edward Tindall’s father worked at the Walker-Gordon farm, and he himself worked at the farm for several summers.  Edward went on to become a practicing veterinarian in New Jersey for nearly 40 years, and also developed implantable microchip technology for animals. The Raw Milk Institute is pleased to have Edward Tindall DVM on our Advisory Board.

In the late 1990’s, Edward co-authored a book about the Walker-Gordon farm titled Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind. Edward was kind enough to share more information about this extraordinary farm in a written interview. 

1.      Can you tell us about what made Walker-Gordon dairy farm so special?

Walker-Gordon was never intended to be just a dairy. The actual name was Walker-Gordon Laboratory Company, imprinted on their bottles and responsible for numerous innovations in the field of dairy. Among these were the first rotary centralized milking parlor, milking 1650 head. 50 cows were milked at a time (every 12 and a half minutes or one revolution) on the ʻRotolactorʼ.

The milk was immediately refrigerated, and if intended for the Philadelphia, New York or Boston market, shipped within hours from a refrigerated box car of the Pennsylvania Railroad on a siding adjacent to the milking parlor.

The cows were attended 24 hours a day by herdsmen in 50 cow barns with constant attention to keeping the cows bedded on fresh peanut shell bedding and groomed, with ever present fresh water on demand, fed grain and excellent alfalfa hay year-round.

Other innovations were the addition of irradiated yeast to feeding regimens to enhance vitamin D (prophylaxis against childhood rickets), production of acidophilous milk for enteric health, harvesting crops at prime time for storage regardless of weather conditions, use of byproducts (fecal waste) for garden fertilizers, artificial insemination, crop production by cooperative farms under control and supervision of central organization, and extensive record keeping of health and productivity of each cow.

Bottling was done immediately adjacent to the Rotolactor. The milk, "certified and unpasteurized," was not exposed to anything but sterilized stainless steel and glass.

2.     What production and milking practices were used to keep the milk safe for people?

Cleanliness was ever a constant protocol. The cows were pre-washed with warm water prior to entering the milking parlor. There they were toweled by attendants in white uniforms, attached to sterilized stainless steel milkers, and the milk fed to Pyrex glass containers and delivered through stainless steel pipes to the bottling plant adjacent to the milking platform.

All milking personnel had weekly examinations and throat cultures by the local physician. Milk was routinely cultured in an on-site laboratory for bacterial counts and pathogens.

3. Since you were employed there for a time, tell us about what you did and what it was like to work there?

My employment was several summers working on maintenance and the storage of alfalfa hay. During haying season the crop was harvested at prime time regardless of the weather. Chopped in the field, blown into stake bodied trucks and delivered to the massive dehydrators, it was compressed into 110 to 130 pound bales around the clock. Starting a 7:00 am, the hay was stored in large barns, often in 120 degree summer temperatures.

Hay being delivered to the dehydrator for preservation. In later years, it was chopped into more manageable size for compression and baling.

4.    What kind of milk did this dairy produce?

Walker-Gordon produced Grade A, whole milk, unpasteurized of the highest quality the industry has ever known, from its inception in the earliest years of the twentieth century until it stopped production in 1971.

“For those of us who grew up with the taste of fresh, really fresh, whole milk, unadulterated in any manner except to chill it ice cold, today’s milk is a sad replacement…

 The unequaled taste of an ice cold half pint of milk, the cream layered on the top, after working several uninterrupted hours in excessively hot temperatures… I have yet to equal that flavor…”

~Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind

5.     Who were the usual customers for this milk?

The customers were the general public locally, with home delivery, and public markets from Washington, DC to Boston, Ma. A renowned quality product hailed for freshness and longevity, it had a very loyal consumer base. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when traveling abroad by ship, insisted that Walker-Gordon milk and cream be available, on board, for the trip.

6.    What was the safety record of this dairy that operated for about 8 decades up until 1971?

The safety record of Walker-Gordon milk and milk products was above reproach and I can find no instances (nor have I heard of any) of any untoward or adverse instances of health problems or lawsuits. Safety of personnel was extremely good. Farm accidents are ever present and WG had some, but fewer than would be expected.

“Cheaper milk from the heartland of America, increased labor costs, higher taxes, wages, and insurances, difficulty in attracting farm labor, the sky-rocketing value of land, and pressure for housing for an increasing and increasingly affluent population all contributed to the demise of farming in general, in New Jersey and elsewhere, and in particular to Walker-Gordon with its emphasis on high quality, first and foremost.”

~Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind

7.     What future potential do you see for raw milk dairy farming?

Prognostications of the future of raw milk dairy farming is fraught with the same magnitude of variables as the future of the country. I would like to believe that the future is positive, for indeed, I can think of no more beneficial product than clean, wholesome, properly handled raw milk that is fresh from the cow and unaltered by pasteurization or other untoward handling.

The vicissitudes of government and the legal profession, swayed by propaganda and functioning under ignorance of biology and a mindset that excludes information that does not align with biased public opinion is a very large hurdle to clear. As long as there is a discerning public with the economic wherewithal to acquire a quality product, the market is assured. I admire the efforts of individuals such as Dr. Joseph Heckman and Mark McAfee that take up the torch, live and advocate the premise, and forward such a noble cause.

Paving the Way with Safe Raw Milk

The Walker-Gordon dairy was certainly an exceptional dairy. Walker Gordon’s eight decades of safe raw milk production are an imminent example of what can be achieved through dedication and innovation.  At its peak, the Walker-Gordon dairy was producing 6,500 gallons of milk daily. Through hygienic practices and regular bacteria testing of its milk, Walker Gordon dairy was able to provide safe raw milk for thousands of people over several generations.

The last Certified Medical Milk dairy in the USA was Alta Dena dairy in Los Angeles, California.  Alta Dena produced its last quart of raw milk in May of 1999. With the end of the American Association of Medical Milk Commissions and their certification of raw milk dairies, there was a great need for leadership in safe raw milk.

The Raw Milk Institute (RAWMI) was created to fulfill this need.  RAWMI teaches well-established scientific principles and good production methods to assist farmers in producing hygienic, safe raw milk. Through its LISTING program, RAWMI assists farmers in developing risk analysis and management plans (RAMP) for their unique farms. RAWMI’s Common Standards have set an international benchmark for bacterial testing of raw milk.

Edward Tindall’s book, “Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind” is available from Covered Bridge Press, 39 Upper Creek Road, Stockton, New Jersey 08559 at $25 dollars per copy, plus USPS shipping. Covered Bridge Press can be reached at 908-996-4420.

Walker-Gordon: One of a Kind. Book by Edward Tindall, DVM.

The Fascinating History of Milk Kefir

Milk kefir is a fermented probiotic drink that is renowned for its healthful properties. Studies have shown that milk kefir is correlated with a wide range of health benefits, including improved digestion [1], lower blood pressure and cholesterol [2], cancer prevention [1], improved immune systems [3], and reduced asthma and allergies [2]. Milk kefir is a thick and slightly effervescent drink, with a sour, creamy taste.

Milk Kefir is Unique

Although there are many different types of fermented milk around the world [4], milk kefir is unique because it is made with kefir “grains.”  Kefir grains are not true grains, but are actually symbiotic colonies of bacteria and yeast in a protein and lipid matrix. Kefir grains resemble pieces of cauliflower, and they ferment the milk through breaking down the lactose into lactic acid and other beneficial components.

Milk kefir is now widely known and consumed in many countries throughout the world, but for many centuries, milk kefir was a closely-guarded secret of the Northern Caucasus region in Russia. The people of the Northern Caucasus region are renowned for their longevity, with one of the highest proportions of centenarians in the world. Milk kefir is a dietary staple in this region. 

Traditionally, milk kefir was made by combining fresh milk and kefir grains inside goatskin bags. During the daytime, the goatskin bags were hung in the sunshine of the doorways, and prodded or pushed by each person who went through the doorway. As the milk kefir was consumed, more fresh milk was added to the goatskin bag, forming a continuous fermentation cycle.

Grains of the Prophet

The people of the Caucasus mountains have been making kefir for hundreds (or even thousands) of years. In this region, kefir grains are known by the name “Grains of the Prophet” [5]. Their traditional legend about the origin of kefir grains is that the prophet Mohammed gifted kefir grains to the Orthodox Christians in this region [6]. Mohammed is said to have taught the people how to make kefir, and the people revered kefir as a health-promoting food.  

The kefir grains and methods for making kefir were kept secret by people in the Caucasus mountains for many generations. Owning kefir grains was equated with wealth in this region. The people believed that the benefits of kefir would somehow be diminished if the secrets of making kefir were shared outside of their region. Marco Polo is said to have tried kefir, and kefir was prized as a medicinal food, yet the keys to making kefir were not shared until the early 1900’s.

A True Tale of Deceit, Capture, and Retribution

Since milk kefir was a closely guarded secret, how did it ever become more widely known? This is where the story of milk kefir gets even more interesting.

The Russian immunologist Dr. Ilya Ilyich Metchnikoff (who received the Nobel Prize for his work on immunity in 1908) became interested in learning about the causes of the exceptional longevity of the people in the Caucasus region and other regions. Metchnikoff came to the conclusion that soured milk, including milk kefir, was one of the keys to longevity and well-being. Following the publication of Metchnikoff’s book, The Prolongation of Life, in 1907, the All Russian Physicians’ Society became determined to use milk kefir as a medicinal treatment for their patients.

Caucasus Region. Image from freeworldmaps.net

The Blandov brothers, from Moscow Dairy, were commissioned by the All Russian Physicians’ Society to obtain kefir grains from the tribes in the Caucasus mountains. However, the tribes refused to sell any kefir grains to the Blandov brothers. Undaunted, the brothers came up with a scheme to obtain the kefir grains: they would send a beautiful woman to the court of tribal Prince Bek-Mirza Barchorov, and with her allure she would obtain the kefir grains. Irina Sakharova, an employee of the Blandov brothers, was chosen for this important mission [5].

Irina Sakharova and Prince Barchorov, 1908. Image from Revolution Fermentation

Although Irina succeeded in attracting the interest of Prince Barcharov, he refused to give her any kefir grains. Irina departed from the Prince, but tribesmen were sent to capture her with the intention of forcing her to marry the Prince. The Blandov brothers mounted a rescue of Irina before the forced marriage could take place.

When Irina presented her grievance before the Czar, Prince Barcharov was ordered to make retribution to Irina. Although she was offered gold and jewels, Irina refused. She could only be compensated for what she had endured in one way: with kefir grains. The Czar ordered Prince Barcharov to give Irina 10 pounds of kefir grains!

Kefir as Medicine

Once the Blandov brothers had the milk kefir grains, they began making kefir for the All Russian Physicians’ Society. Kefir was used in Russian hospitals to treat a wide variety of conditions including digestive disorders, cancer, artherosclerosis, and tuberculosis [5]. Even now, kefir is routinely used for hospital patients, infants, and infirm people in Eastern Europe [7].

By the 1930’s, kefir was being produced on a large scale to meet widespread public demand in Russia. It took several decades for the commercial process of making kefir on a large scale to be perfected. Milk kefir was introduced to the western world by the 1960’s. Recently, milk kefir has become a much sought-after food with a rapidly growing global market.

Currently, many health-conscious consumers use kefir grains to easily produce their own milk kefir at home. Unlike the commercial kefir that was developed in Russia, most of the commercially-prepared kefir on the market today is made with direct-set powdered kefir cultures. These powdered cultures contain considerably fewer probiotic strains than kefir grains, but they produce a more consistent commercial product. From its ancient origins to today, milk kefir is a superfood that has enriched the health of humanity. 

References

[1] Zeynep B. Guzel-Seydim, Tugba Kok-Tas, Annel K. Greene & Atif C. Seydim. "Review: Functional Properties of Kefir." Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 51:3, 261-268, 2011. doi: 10.1080/10408390903579029

[2] Bourrie, Benjamin C T et al. “The Microbiota and Health Promoting Characteristics of the Fermented Beverage Kefir.” Frontiers in microbiology vol. 7 647, 2016. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.00647

[3] de Oliveira Leite, Analy Machado et al. “Microbiological, technological and therapeutic properties of kefir: a natural probiotic beverage.” Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] vol. 44,2 341-9, 2013. doi:10.1590/S1517-83822013000200001

[4] “Fermented milk products”, Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, August 11 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermented_milk_products

[5] Shavit, E. “Renewed Interest in Kefir, the Ancient Elixir of Longevity.” Fungi, vol. 1-2, 2008. http://www.medicinabiomolecular.com.br/biblioteca/pdfs/Doencas/do-1175.pdf

[6] Seifi, P. “Magical Kefir.” Russian Life website, 2016. https://russianlife.com/stories/online/magical-kefir/

[7] Nielsen B, Gürakan GC, Unlü G. “Kefir: a multifaceted fermented dairy product.” Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 6:123–135, 2014. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25261107/ 

Why Humans Drink (RAW) Milk

Why Did Ancient Humans Start Consuming Milk From Other Mammals?

10,000 years ago, early humans spent much of their time hunting, gathering, or fishing for food. Obtaining food was the dominant preoccupation of their lives. Imagine the reality for humans living prior to the advent of civilization. You can picture them living in crude shelters, wearing animal skins and using few tools. It was not like a 14-day survival challenge where they could call for a medic and be rescued. Eating and surviving were lifelong challenges.

You can hear the crying of babies and children that were hungry. Those cries are universal and have not changed over the millennia. The natural instinct to provide for the next generation was a compelling mandate which drove instinctual and natural innovation.

Early humans nursed their young, just as all mammals do. Nursing provided optimal nutrition for babies to survive and thrive. Breastmilk is a form of raw milk, serving as a complete food source that is perfectly designed to sustain life.

People observed animals in the wild nursing their young just as they nursed their own young. By capturing goats and aurochs (ancestral cow breeds), the people were able to collect their milk in pottery vessels. These humans would have learned quickly that milk from other animals was a complete, nutritious food. Being purposely designed to sustain life like no other food, this raw milk provided a steady source of readily available food for ancient humans.

Without refrigeration, any milk that wasn’t consumed quickly would naturally ferment into cheese curd and whey. The milk storage vessels likely contained bacteria cultures from previous milkings, and hence the culturing process was naturally reinforced with these bacteria.  The resultant curds could be stored and consumed over time. Curd contained a complete set of microbiome-friendly nutrients, and would be easy to digest due to its biodiversity. The humans could now bring along with them a portable supply of steady food. As long as they had sunshine, water, grass or shrubbery, and a mammal, they had food.  

Scientists have ample evidence that humans began drinking raw milk from animals at least 10,000 years ago. The evidence for the early use of animal milk is found in ancient clay pottery vessels, dental remains of Neolithic humans, and bone analysis of animal remains. Ancient baby bottles provide evidence that milk from animals was used to feed human infants at least 8,000 years ago.

The origin and dispersal of domestic livestock species in the Fertile Crescent. (Zeder, Melinda)

These agriculture-based civilizations were so successful that they spread across the Mediterranean region, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East over the next few thousand years. Humanity continued to domesticate additional species of animals; throughout history, many species have been utilized for their milk including camels, cows, goats, sheep, donkeys, horses, water buffalo, reindeer, and other mammals.

Those who consumed milk had a competitive advantage over those that did not have a steady source of readily available food.  This steady supply of food allowed for settlements and communities to develop. People no longer had to spend most of their time acquiring food, and could instead use their brain power to drive the development of sophisticated structures and towns. Domesticated animals became high value assets. As civilization advanced, those that owned milking mammals became wealthy and became the source of food for communities.

Selection of late Bronze/early Iron Age feeding vessels.(J Dunne, et al.)

Lactase and Genetic Adaptations for Milk

The domestication of mammals and consumption of their raw milk provided a source of biodiverse colonies of bacteria for the human gut. When people began drinking raw milk at least 10,000 years ago, these biodiverse bacteria began the genomic adaptation for lactase production and lactase persistence genes. Lactase is the enzyme responsible for breaking down lactose into digestible form. 

Humans who first began to consume milk from other mammals had not yet developed the lactase persistence gene. Nonetheless, they likely would have been able to readily digest raw milk because it facilitates the production of lactase enzyme in the intestinal tract. Archaeological evidence shows that humans were consuming raw milk for thousands of years before the widespread appearance of the lactase-persistence gene. This has led many researchers to the probably erroneous conclusion that Neolithic humans must have been fermenting or culturing milk to reduce or remove its lactose content.  

In reality, “lactose-intolerance” is primarily pasteurization intolerance.  Since raw milk facilitates the production of lactase, it is not likely that there were widespread issues with lactose intolerance in Neolithic populations. In all likelihood, these early populations would have been able to consume milk in its fresh form straight from the mammals, as well as in the lacto-fermented curds and whey which would form quickly without refrigeration.  

Stone carving at the ancient Sumerian temple of Ninhursag showing typical dairy activities. (Dorling Kindersley, The Visual Dictionary of Ancient Civilizations)

The competitive advantage provided by raw milk is not to be understated. Raw milk allowed humans to thrive in conditions where survival would have been difficult. It allowed them to migrate and proliferate from region to region with a steady supply of food. Those populations that consumed milk further adapted by developing lactase-persistence genes. Scientists now believe that the lactase-persistence genes were spread through natural selection. This means that the reproductive capacity and/or survivability of ancient raw milk drinkers was substantially increased compared to non-milk-drinking populations. The lactase-persistence genes would have facilitated the easy digestion of milk in many forms, including boiled or cooked milk. There is current evidence of lactase persistence genes in people from regions of Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. However, even those without the lactase-persistent gene can generally digest raw milk because of the raw milk bacteria that create lactase for the human gut. 

Pasteurization: A Technological Solution to a Manmade Problem

A 19th century illustration of "swill milk" being produced: a sickly cow being milked while held up by ropes. (Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Weekly)

By the mid-1800’s in America, some raw milk production had shifted away from farms and into highly-populated cities. Big cities did not have pastures or clean water, and the cows in city dairies were kept in filthy conditions with poor nutrition and poor animal health. Many of these cows were fed byproducts from alcohol distilleries, leading to illness in the cows. Raw milk, which had been safely consumed by humans for nearly 10,000 years, had become a source of deadly diseases such as tuberculosis, typhoid, diphtheria, and scarlet fever. 

In the late 1800's, it was recognized that raw milk being produced in these conditions was dangerous, and two solutions were proposed.  Pasteurization was one of the solutions which was proposed to eliminate pathogenic bacteria in the milk coming from these filthy conditions. The other solution was to actually produce the milk in hygienic conditions with healthy animals.  

It was known that raw milk was a superior source of nutrition for infants and children, so the American Association of Medical Milk Commissions (AAMMC) was established in the late 1800's to ensure a safe supply of hygienic raw milk. The AAMMC was in operation for nearly a century, certifying medical raw milk for use in hospitals and for feeding infants and children.  

Pasteurization was ushered in to address filthy conditions and unhealthy cows in cities.  It answered the question of how to commercialize dirty milk, rather than spending the time and energy it would take to produce clean milk from healthy cows. Clearly, over time, the pasteurization movement gained traction and became the standard for ensuring "safe" milk, yet pasteurization is known to degrade and damage many of the nutrients in milk. 

Raw Milk’s Role in 2020

Now, in 2020, we are in a time of widespread immune depression, comorbidities, and compromised health. For most Americans, the competitive advantage of raw milk consumption has never been a reality. Raw milk’s immune-building properties and microbiome friendly traits have been forgotten. 

Instead, we live in the age of immune-destructive pharmaceuticals and antibiotics. Although life-saving  in certain applications, these drugs also depress and damage the immune system and gut microbiome. Antibiotic resistance is now responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people every year in the USA alone. Furthermore, pasteurized milk is now recognized as a top food allergen and difficult to digest.  

Raw milk is an innate part of our healthy immune history, and is largely missing in our sterile, sugar-laden, preservative-laced, antibiotic-abusing modern diets and medical culture.  Safe raw milk has been rediscovered by those who study history and know the role of raw milk as a nourishing whole food.  Raw milk that is carefully and intentionally produced for direct human consumption is wholly different from milk being produced for pasteurization.  

So, the next time that someone says, “milk is for cows and not for humans,” share with them the intricate link between civilization and raw milk, and the competitive advantage that raw milk provided to humanity for 10,000 years. Many of these misinformed humans are in dire need of gut microbiome rescue like never before. Reach out to them with love, compassion and humanity. They need our support, nourishment, and education.