I’ve long heard vegans trumpet alleged links between milk and prostate cancer as a way of discouraging people from drinking milk. My reaction to that has tended to be that, prima facie, vegans have a point about the ethics of milk (or at least how we currently produce it), but it’s probably just wishful thinking when they insist the most ethical diet is also the healthiest. (See previous post about the health/ethics/cost balancing act for food.)
But now, via a vegan friend on Facebook, I find out that Harvard has left milk off of its healthy eating recommendations. Due to the associated cancer risk, they recommend limiting milk and dairy to one or two servings per day. Harvard isn’t exactly clear, though, on why milk might be bad for you.
Right away, though, reading Harvard’s recommendations I think if I only cared about health, I’d eat chicken for animal protein (and possibly other nutrients that hard to get without eating animal products), and supplement for calcium. But given that the number of animals killed in chicken production is much worse than for milk, I decided to do some more searching.Some sites that came up when I Googled milk and cancer risk suggested the issue was added hormones, which can be avoided by drinking organic milk. Another site suggested the evidence was ambiguous.
Wikipedia makes the issues sound unclear. Maybe it’s too much calcium, maybe it’s too much vitamin A, we don’t know. Notably, Wikipedia suggests skim milk may be worse in some ways because of added vitamin A, which is a problem for drinking skim milk to avoid getting too much animal fat.
I’m not sure what to make of all this. For the time being, I think I’ll continue to drink my organic skim milk from whole foods, while limiting myself to Harvard’s two servings on most days.