5 ms·
Is shorter always bad? With all the growth hormones given to cows it'd make sense some would go through to the milk and likely affect kids, wouldn't really be a
by marricks 9y ago
Is shorter always bad? With all the growth hormones given to cows it'd make sense some would go through to the milk and likely affect kids, wouldn't really be a good thing...
- oculusthrift 9y agoi don't think a kid being shorter in general is bad but if the average is going down it points to some sort of malnutrition. And by the way, mothers aren't given growth hormone. Also there is no proof of significant GH levels in cows milk or else every pro athlete would drink it constantly.
- marricks 9y agoAh, I misread it as "alternative to cow's milk" which I've seen around a lot.
- ceejayoz 9y agoAny growth hormone making it to the milk is likely to get denatured by pasteurization and further digested in the stomach.
- irixusr 9y agoInteresting. I've never heard of this fragility of hormones, could you expand a bit?
- ceejayoz 9y agoGrowth hormone is a peptide. Heat denatures peptides, and our digestive tract is specifically designed to break them down into their constituent amino acids.
- irixusr 9y agoInteresting. I've never heard of this fragility of hormones, could you expand a bit?
- soofaloofa 9y agoGrowth hormones are banned on Canadian dairy farms.
- elif 9y agoArtificial growth hormones may be banned, but endogenous ones[0] are unavoidable. Cow's milk evolved to make calves grow, this is not an avoidable minutia when attempting to comparatively characterize milk alternatives as stunting growth, but likely the central finding. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin
- irixusr 9y agoUnavoidable? Hardly. You just have a veal industry on the side. Milk has been produced for millennia before hormones of any type were added. Furthermore Canada has milk production quotas so, depending how they're set, hormones might not be necessary to max production at all.
- jobigoud 9y agoYou didn't understand GP comment. Cow's milk is the single thing that grows calves hundreds of Kg in a few months. It has growing hormones in it, naturally.
- ThrustVectoring 9y agoYeah. All else equal, I'd rather have a taller child. If I could have invested $1M in the S&P 500 at birth or be seven feet tall, I'd take the height.
- imron 9y ago7 feet is in the range where you'll encounter daily inconveniences for being tall - from having difficulty finding clothes and shoes that fit, to always having to duck your head, to having feet always sticking off the end of the bed, to having to squash in to bus, plane and car seats - or you'll have to pay a premium to avoid such things. I'm 6'3 and still get that to some degree. I like being this tall, but I think 6'1 or 6'2 are probably around the ideal height to reap the benefits of being tall, without being too affected by the drawbacks.
- gutnor 9y agoYou must seriously value being tall. I wouldn't mind being 5ft tall with 25 million in my bank account. edit: bad math not 2.5 billion, still 25 million is not bad, I take it in exchange of 1 foot 7in.
- douche 9y agoThis would likely be largely dependent on your birthdate. At various eras, the structure of NBA contracts and the collective bargaining agreement would have a large impact on your expected earnings. There's a window of time in which virtually anyone seven feet or over who could walk and chew bubblegum at the same time could have a very high chance of earning serious money as an NBA center, even with minimal skills[1]. If you came of age in the salad days of ridiculous rookie contracts, after the NBA had exploded in popularity and TV and advertising money ballooned salaries, and the newer, cheaper, rookie contract scales had yet to come into effect, this very well could be valid tradeoff. [1] http://www.truthaboutit.net/2012/05/true-or-false-half-of-all-7-footers-are-in-the-nba.html http://www.truthaboutit.net/2012/05/true-or-false-half-of-al...
- irixusr 9y agoI thought if that, but This is a Canadian study. Canadian diary industry is very different from the US, so it's not obvious that you'd find hormones in the milk (there are per cow milk production quotas). Certainly not in the quantities found in US milk.
- rocky1138 9y agoDo you have a source for this?
- irixusr 9y agoon what? The production quotas are my only factual claim. But here's wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_farming_in_Canada https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dairy_farming_in_Canada (The national post had a great series of articles about it. The Canadian newspaper sided with Trump against Canada's diary industry.) Btw, Milk costs double in Canada than in the states. Tastes better though (well sour cream and yoghurt do. I hate milk). On the other hand cheese is much better in the states cause I can afford the European stuff here (100% import tarriff???) and there is more diversity in aisles. As to the hormone part of my OP, no claim, at least no strong claim, was made. I just pointed out that, if your production is restricted, it doesn't make sense to pump your cows full of hormones.
- irixusr 9y agoI thought if that, but This is a Canadian study. Canadian diary industry is very different from the US, so it's not obvious that you'd find hormones in the milk (there are per cow milk production quotas). Certainly not in the quantities found in US milk.