In my video on milk and bones,

I discussed this set of studies,

following a hundred thousand people for up to two decades,

finding a 60% higher risk of hip fracture

among women who drank a lot of milk.

The researchers suggested it might be due to the galactose,

which is a breakdown product of the milk sugar lactose,

based on the fact that people with high levels in their blood,

because they were born with an inability to detoxify the stuff,

can end up with weakened bones.

But that's not all galactose can do.

Galactose is what scientists use

to cause accelerated aging in lab animals,

since it's so successful at mimicking aging

by inducing degenerative changes in the brain,

heart, lungs, liver, kidney, etc.

"Life-shortened animals showed neurodegeneration,

mental retardation, and cognitive dysfunction,

diminished immune responses

and a reduction of reproductive ability."

And it doesn't take much,

just the human equivalent

of one to two glasses worth of milk a day.

However, humans aren't rodents.

For example, we've known for nearly a century

that you can cause cataracts in rats

by feeding them lots of lactose or galactose,

but the epidemiological data is mixed

as to whether dairy is doing the same in people.

The Swedish studies didn't just look at bone, though,

but milk and mortality.

More milk was associated with more death.

In women, three glasses of milk a day

was associated with nearly twice the risk of dying prematurely.

The medical journal editorial

accompanying the study emphasized that,

given the rise in milk consumption

around the world,

the "role of milk in mortality

needs to be established definitively now."

With the then-largest-ever study on milk intake and mortality

suggesting such adverse effects,

Harvard researchers stepped in with three of their cohorts

to form a study twice as big

to see if the earlier findings were just a fluke.

Following more than 200,000 men and women

for up to three decades,

they confirmed the bad news.

Those who consumed more dairy

lived significantly shorter lives.

Every half serving more of regular milk a day

was associated with 9% increased risk of dying

from cardiovascular disease,

11% increased risk of dying from cancer,

and an 11% increased risk of dying

from all causes put together.

This is all the more remarkable

since milk drinking is typically associated

with healthier habits,

like more exercise and less smoking and drinking,

though they did try to control for all these factors.

Of course it does matter what you eat instead.

This Harvard analysis published

in the New England Journal of Medicine,

found that swapping dairy for meat,

red meat, poultry, or fish,

would not be expected to do your body any favors,

and you would be expected to live longer eating dairy

than eggs or processed meat.

It's only when you swap dairy

for plant-based sources of protein

did they find a significant drop in mortality risk.

When all of the milk and mortality studies

are put together,

it appears the excess mortality risk

is limited to regular as opposed to low-fat, like skim milk.

This suggests it may be more of a saturated fat issue,

though that doesn't explain why soured, or fermented milk

appears to have the opposite impact.

So maybe it's both the butterfat and the galactose.

A randomized crossover study of low-fat dairy,

fermented dairy, and unfermented dairy

found that study subjects

had significantly higher IL-6 inflammation levels

during unfermented regular dairy weeks

compared to when they were switched to either

the fermented or low-fat dairy products.

The fermentation process can eliminate some of the galactose.

As we age, our ability to detoxify galactose

declines by as much as 40%,

which would make it even more important

to avoid dairy later in life

if indeed galactose is the culprit.

But if galactose does its dirty work

through oxidation and inflammation,

might increased fruit and vegetable intake

help mediate some of the harm?

In animals, galactose-induced aging

can be slowed by fruit and vegetable consumption.

For example, feeding rats blueberries

can decrease the brain damage induced by the milk sugar.

Might it be able to help

with the higher levels of oxidative stress

and inflammation found among human milk drinkers?

Unfortunately, women drinking three or more glasses of milk

a day had more than twice the risk of hip fractures

compared to women drinking less than a glass a day

regardless of whether they were eating more, or less,

fruits and vegetables.

But, those high milk consumers

consuming five or more servings of fruits and vegetables a day

did reduce their chance of dying prematurely

to just 60% greater than those drinking less milk,

so antioxidant rich foods

may be able to modify the elevated death rate

associated with high milk consumption.

Highly influential advocacy organizations,

such as the US National Osteoporosis Foundation

or the Europe-based

International Osteoporosis Foundation,

continue to push dairy, drugs, and calcium supplements,

despite the countervailing evidence that I've reviewed.

Why do they keep pushing dairy, drugs, and supplements?

Perhaps because their objectivity is compromised

by the influence of their commercial sponsors

that include companies that market, you guessed it,

dairy, drugs, and supplements.

Most recent reviews on dairy and osteoporosis

in the English-language medical literature

were found to be written

by those with ties to the dairy industry.

The primary justification for inclusion of dairy

in federal nutrition recommendations

is based on purported bone benefits

that are not supported by the available evidence.

What if dietary guidelines were fashioned

without commercial influence?

In 2019, Canada decided to exclude industry reports

and stick to the science

in the formation of their new dietary guidelines.

What a concept.

Major changes include the new emphasis

on plant-based food intake, limiting junk,

and...the removal of the dairy food group.