Thanks to one of my lovely supporters, Ulrike, for sending me the paper being reviewed for this week’s note. Almost every week, we real foodies see some non-sense having been published attacking the staples: meat; eggs; dairy products... Every bit of common sense tells us that these nutrient-dense foods must be good for us. Every side-by-side analysis of vitamins and minerals confirms that these foods beat ‘hands down’ the ‘healthy whole grains’ that we are advised to consume instead.
The study Ulrike found looked at fermented milk, nonfermented milk, butter and cheese. It further looked at different fat content versions of nonfermented milk. Fermented and nonfermented milk were not well defined in the paper, but “soured milk and yogurt” were put in brackets after “fermented milk” a couple of times in the narrative. Such products are characterised by the presence of bacteria, known to be beneficial for the gut. Think of nonfermented milk as essentially shop bought milk – anything from cartons from the supermarket, to milk shakes in McDonalds, to lattes in coffee shops. (I’m going to use the term ‘shop’ milk instead of nonfermented milk from now on – except in quotations from the paper – as it will make this note easier to read).
As Ulrike said – how best to dissect these studies to spot what has been done in the latest attempt to demonise real food? Using this paper as an example, I’ll go through the best way to review such studies.
