My generation invented sex!

Lets try to find out what sort of casein humans produce. Is it different from cow casein?

Nancy, I provided the link on human and cow’s casein comparison earlier on in discussion; however that research isn’t comprehensive enough, so I’d also encourage to look for more detailed break-down.

There is one general point that we left somehow in the background behind all the thicket of elaborations and philosophisms:
I mean phylogenetic comparative methods and precision carbon isotope analyses performed with the ancient fossilized remains. The results of such analyses clearly and accurately indicated that the Paleolithic societies consumed either solely meat or meat and grass in various proportions, but none, none of these bones analyses whatsoever proved the myth of dairy presence in protodiet.

Obviously I agree that adult mammals don't drink milk naturally, and I see from the quote above that there's no evidence of human drinking of animal milk in paleo period.

But I'm trying to understand if there is an argument against casein in pure biochemical terms. OK some people here are intolerant to casein, but many people are not, so I don't see that supporting the idea that no-one should consume milk. And casein breaks down into an opioid peptide, and that could have opiate-type effects in the brain. But I read spinach also contains a compound that breaks down into an opioid peptide, so casein is not unique. And presumably the opiate effects will vary between different opioid peptides, with some having relatively little effect and being harmless.

I am not trying to argue for drinking milk - I'm just trying to understand if there is a biochemical argument against casein.

From that basic link alone, you may well see there are differences in bovine/human milk. I don’t have time to unearth relevant extended studies, perhaps well-knowledged Nancy can offer some.

Pauleo, I believe, you should, first and foremost, take into account the most crucial point of all: 10 thous. years of agriculture as compared to 3 millions of human natural selection and molding is such a ridiculous whimper in universe to show any obvious impact. Well, to be accurate, actually it did bring an effect, but far from being positive, you all know how debilitating it was; the high accuracy fossil records show that after adoption of agriculture human health, body-build, longevity all went into sharp decline, and this is all because deep down in the genetic level we are not wired for this food products; (if follow my previous metaphor), there are no molds to fit grains and dairy, while there are molds to accept meat or spinach you mentioned, genetically at 99.99% we are still the same savage hunters, equipped with cell phones though.

Right, I definitely agree with this basic principle!

Well, the opiod thing may harm some people, not everyone true. The histamine thing doesn't sound too good for anyone.
But even outside of that there's a lot of hormones in Cow milk that are far out of proportion to what a human (infant or adult) would get. At least, that is what Cordain argues in his newletter here: http://thepaleodiet.com/newsletter/...rierVol2No5.pdf
But would that be the case for goat or sheep milk? Maybe not so much.

Thanks for reposting that, I haven't followed this thread religiously because it got too contentious.

It was interesting to read about the molecular differences in cow/human casein, but I wish they had assigned a type to it, like k- a-, a2, etc. Well, perhaps I'll turn up the information at some time!

If I followed this thread religiously, I'd either be wacko or in hell. But I have to say, that of all the arguments for, against, and about dairy, I'd have to err on the side of the paleontologists/anthropologists over that of chemistry.

must feel good to be the only person on the block who
could describe an opioid peptide though. just don't try
doing it after a beer in case you end up talking about
optide pepoids instead.

............

Hey, Ysabella dug up something interesting on milk over here.

How is drinking milk a "non-paleo" idea? Because humans didn't drink cow (or goat, or ewe) milk in the paleolithic era? People didn't consume canola oil, either -- does that mean Loren Cordain would be told to go to another forum if he tried to post some excerpts from his book here? (He advocates consuming canola oil.)

There are several points here:

1. Loren Cordain and Ray Audette don't own the word "paleo." Just because Cordain says to trim the fat off of meats, or to limit your intake of eggs, doesn't mean that the opposite views are non-paleo. So the fact that Cordain and Audette don't advocate consuming dairy does not mean that dairy-consumption is a non-paleo idea.

2. Similarly, just because adult humans didn't drink cows milk in the paleolithic era doesn't mean that dairy-consumption is a non-paleo idea. A lot of paleo dieters take fish oil capsules, for example, even though such capsules were not available in the paleolithic era. I already mentioned canola oil. Similarly, seedless bananas were not available in the paleolithic era. Just about every fruit and vegetable currently available to us was not available in the same form during the paleolithic era. That doesn't mean all modern fruits and vegetables should be barred from discussion on this forum.

3. So if the paleo diet is not about what Cordain and Audette say, and it's not about consuming only foods that were available during the paleolithic era, what is it about? I'll give you my own answer: The essence of the paleo diet is that we should consume foods that our bodies are well adapted to consuming. Twinkies were not generally available to our ancestors during the time that our bodies were being shaped by evolution, so it's no surprise that our bodies are not well adapted to eating twinkies. Animal meats (including organs, glands, and marrow), on the other hand, were eaten by our ancestors during the time that our bodies were being shaped by evolution, and we consequently do well with them. There's no magic date that marks the cut-off between what we're adapted to eat and what we aren't adapted to eat, however. Pretty much everything our ancestors consumed during the paleolithic era is -- or, rather, would be (since most of it is currently unavailable) -- quite nutritious for us to consume. Certain foods that were not available during the paleolithic era, like the modern banana and many other modern fruits, may nonetheless be healthful for us to consume because they share enough properties with the foods commonly available in our evolutionary past. Other foods not available during the paleolithic era, like the Twinkie, do not share many properties with the foods commonly available in our evolutionary past and should be avoided.

4. So the paleo-relevant question here is: Is milk more like a modern banana, or is it more like a Twinkie? Do its nutritional properties resemble what our ancestors ate while our bodies were being shaped by evolution such that it is a healthful food for us? Or not? You can't get the answer simply by checking a timeline to see when humans started consuming it. Doing so would rule out not only milk, but modern bananas and a zillion other foods that many paleo-dieters consume (including Cordain's canola oil). For one thing, the nutritional profile of milk may make it healthy for us even if it wasn't consumed more than 10,000 years ago (like modern bananas). For another thing, while evolution often takes at least 50,000 years to make any substantial changes in mammals, that is not always the case. Sometimes changes can come much quicker, and 10,000 years may in fact be enough time for us to have adapted to drinking raw milk. (See the article posted back on like page three or four of this thread.) If the paleo diet is about eating foods we're well adapted to eat, and if it turns out that we (at least some of us) have adaptations that make milk a healthful food for us, then (like the modern banana) it should be considered paleo-friendly.

5. Now the question of whether we (at least some of us) actually are well adapted to consuming dairy such that milk is a healthful food seems to be an open question. That is the question being discussed in this thread, and is a question that is perfectly suitable for this forum. (IMO.) I think kneebrace and others have provided a lot of good information on that issue, and it's a shame that they are being chased away. The issue is quite relevant to the underlying idea supporting paleo nutrition.

Corofan, no one here is trying to take away your bananas or milk. Eat and drink all you want. But just because you do it, doesn't make it Paleo.

I eat many things that aren't considered Paleo, but I'm not trying to convince myself, and especially others, that it is. You want Atkins? Go fer it.

You are right on several points, one of which being that many "modern" vegetables & fruits bear little resemblance to their paleolithic ancestors. And you are right to suggest that it is an approximation that we have to deal with.

But to take something as dubious as dairy and call it Paleo? Enjoy your cheese.