The Udder Truth

The scientific thoughts of a crazy cattle lady, coffee connoisseur, pre-vet student and a full-time Disney princess in pursuit of a BS in Animal Science. 

[katieucdavis-blog]

Caution Needed When Going Dairy-Free

I came across an article about Khloe Kardashian’s 2015 weight loss journey. Her secret? The gym just wasn’t cutting it anymore. Instead, she became dairy-free and lost 11 pounds.

Becoming dairy-free has become a fairly recent craze. It is all over the internet in respect to weight loss and clearing up acne. Leading a dairy-free lifestyle would be difficult for most as it means eliminating milk products from their diet. That means no butter, cheese and possibly happiness. Seems pretty foolproof, right?

However, the Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not established any regulations concerning the use of “dairy-free” on packaging labels. In fact, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ensures that companies do not use misleading or false terms on food labels.

Without regulatory definitions provided by the FDA, there is no guarantee that “dairy-free” is free from milk proteins and sugars. Alisa Fleming from Go Dairy Free was quick to point out that a majority of processed foods with the label of “dairy-free” contain milk proteins or lactose. Most foods are a little easier to spot like macaroni and cheese, but lactose is also in processed lunch meats and in some medications.

This is a concern if someone wanted  to lose additional weight. According to Diet Doctor, lactose, the primary sugar in milk, is responsible for slowing down weight loss:  

Dairy products all contain a varying amount of lactose (the milk sugar), which slows down weight loss. What’s more, part of the protein in milk generates an insulin response, which can have the same effect. Consequently, cutting back on dairy products may accelerate weight loss.

Because dairy-free is not a regulated market, chances are it might contain milk proteins or sugars. Be sure to check food labels and ingredients before you buy a product, especially if you want to reap the benefits of being dairy-free. 

[katieucdavis-blog]

Farmers Put Animal Safety First to Make Organic Products Safe

“Dairy products are an emotional subject,” my dairy cattle production professor said on the first day of class.

He was completely right.

Whenever people talk about their choices in dairy products, it can get a little too personal. The typical arguments within the dairy community are usually about antibiotics or hormones. But, the biggest debate? It’s the production and animal welfare surrounding organic milk.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has put strict regulations on the organic milk market. Organic milk must come from a cow that is getting at least 30 percent of its diet from a pasture, has never been given hormones for growth or reproduction and has never been treated with antibiotics. Whereas non-organic or “conventional” milk could possibly be produced in a similar manner as organic but its production is not held up to the same standards.

Essentially, the main difference between conventional and organic milk is the use of antibiotics to help cure sick animals. And everyone seems to have an opinion about organic production including Beef Magazine columnist Amanda Radke:

When an animal gets sick, it’s our job to tend to that animal. Of course, prevention is also important, but just like people, a bacteria can make an animal feel pretty darn lousy. So it just makes sense that [producers] should have antibiotics as a tool in their toolbox to address these situations as they arise.

Because organic farms cannot administer antibiotics, they often rely on essential oils, vitamin and mineral supplements and other natural remedies to treat infections. Antibiotics are not in their “toolbox.” The natural methods are not as powerful as antibiotics so the animal might require a longer course of treatment. If the treatment is not helping, organic farmers must abide by regulations set by the FDA:

In an emergency, a producer must use antibiotics if necessary to save the life of the animal or to prevent suffering. Use of antibiotics should be based on the recommendation of a vet. Withholding treatment of antibiotics from animals to maintain their organic status is prohibited. If a producer uses antibiotics, they must sell the animal to a conventional dairy farm.

Animal welfare is really important to the dairy and agriculture industry. This is why they have set provisions within organic regulations. The FDA and organic farmers want to ensure their animals are happy, healthy and productive.

[katieucdavis-blog]

FDA Outlaws Antibiotics in Milk Marked for Human Consumption

People still like to claim that there are antibiotics in their milk. Even the Founder and Chief Passionista at Naturally Savvy Andrea Donsky’s stated:

It appears some dairy farmers are slipping their cows antibiotics. This means that unless you choose organic milk and milk products, you could be exposing yourself and your family to these drugs. (Source: Naturally Savvy). 

Nothing could be further from the truth. There will never be antibiotics in milk that is intended for human consumption.

Why?

The United States Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates and tests for any drug residues such as antibiotics in milk. Their website states:

The Pateurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) requires a milk sample to be collected every time raw milk is picked up at the farm (also known as a “universal sample”). A milk sample is also taken when a truckload or bulk tank of milk arrives at a Grade “A” dairy plant for processing. Each arriving truckload of milk at the plant must be tested for the presence of at least four of six specific Beta-lactam drugs (penicillin, ampicillin, amoxicillin, cloxacillin, cephapirin, and ceftiofur).If the truckload of milk tests positive for any form of antibiotic at the dairy plant, they will individually test the universal samples for residues to catch the culprit. The owner of the antibiotic contaminated milk will be fined and will have to pay for the entire truckload of milk. (Source: FDA). 

So, what can farmers do to prevent this scenario from happening?

After administering antibiotics to a sick animal, most farmers opt to put a red leg band around one of the cow’s hind legs as seen in the photo below. The band indicates to their employees that the animal is sick, being treated for her ailment and to collect her milk in a separate tank. The milk from the separate tank will then be dumped as waste or depending upon the operation the antibiotic tainted milk will be pasteurized and then given to the older calves as a way to save money.

(Photo Source: David Barr Photography)

Additionally, dairy farmers keep record of when they have given antibiotics to their animals. Each antibiotic has a withdrawal time or the time required after administration of a drug to a food animal (like the dairy cow) to insure that the residues are below a maximum residue limit (MRL).

Dairy farmers are careful about antibiotics entering into their bulk tank as there are serious consequences for dairy farmers if caught with antibiotics in their milk.

The moral of the story?

The milk that humans consume every day is completely antibiotic free, contrary to popular beliefs. 

[katieucdavis-blog]

FDA Approves Hormones to Increase Milk and Beef Production

We now live in a world where beef cattle can grow 20 percent faster and where dairy cows can produce 11 percent more milk.

What do these animals have in common? Thanks to products such as injections and implants, in the case of cattle, they now have high levels of sex (estrogen in particular) or growth hormones (rBST).

Are their products dangerous for human consumption? What do these hormones do to the environment? What does the Federal Drug and Food Administration (FDA) say about using artificial hormones in animals? What do these products do to the animal?

Well, for one, hormones are supposed to increase an animal’s growth rate and efficiency. In this case, efficiency is ability to convert feed into some form of product (milk or meat). Steroid hormone implants, small pellets that are placed behind an animal’s ear that release hormones at a steady rate, can only be used in meat production system. 

According the FDA’s website, they have not approved a steroid hormone implant for lactating dairy cattle. However, they approved another product that can be used to increase milk production in cattle:

FDA approved a bST product in 1993 with the brand name “Posilac®” (sometribove zinc suspension) after determining that its use would be safe and effective. Posilac® is approved for over-the-counter use in dairy cows starting at around 2 months after the cow has a calf until the end of the lactation period. During this time, cows are injected with Posilac® subcutaneously (under the skin) every 14 days. A cow’s typical lactation period is approximately 10 months long, starting right after she has a calf. Thus, treated dairy cows are typically given Posilac® for about 8 months of the year. After the 10 month lactation period, the producer stops milking the cow to allow a 2-month period for her mammary gland to rest and regenerate before she has a calf and starts the next lactation period.

Recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) is approved by the FDA to increase milk production in lactating dairy cattle. It is based on a naturally occurring growth hormone (somatotropin). The FDA approved rbST’s use for dairy cattle because many scientific studies proved that rbST increases milk production and is safe for human consumption. Naturally, there is bovine growth hormone (bST) in milk because it is a protein produced by a cow. However, bST is not biologically active in our bodies and is different than human somatotropin (hST). Therefore, our digestive system will not recognize bST as a usable hormone, which leads to it being digested like other proteins into simple amino acids.

Here’s a fun fact to chew on: bST makes up 0.000006 percent of total milk protein and that number will not change with rbST treatment.