Alright, I can't resist the temptation to jump in here and pose a
question. I don't believe that cow's milk or any other animal's milk is
"normal"for a human diet in that it was meant to be relied upon for
nutrients. Yet, without milk and our artificial sources of calcium, ie.
calcium fortified oj and XXXX antacids, I find it farfetched that we
should be able to get in 1200 or 1500 mg of calcium daily. Does anyone
know of a traditional diet that meets such needs, or our normal RDA for
calcium? It is my theory that it is the way we eat, the types of foods
and the way we combine them, that affects calcium absorption and thus
calcium dietary requirements.

Consider the case of iron in breastmilk vs formula. It takes 4-5X as much iron
placed in formula as is found in breastmilk for a baby to absorp what he
needs; this is due to bioavailability. Furthermore, a limited study showed
that early introduction of solids (in this test, strained pears) impairs
absorption of iron from breastmilk.  My thought is that, especially in
the U.S., we eat a large variety of foods, heavy in dairy and fat, low in
greens and grains and legumes, and I wonder if the things that we eat are
no longer matched for optimal nutritional input, but rather for good
taste alone. In individual cultures you will find many food combinations
that provide the basis of a good diet, but we have become very eclectic
while being naive of the deficits in nutrition. Does anyone have any
thoughts on my theory? Given a different diet, I wonder if the real need
for calcium is much lower....

-Lisa, with thinking cap on

******************************************************************************
Lisa A. Marasco, IBCLC                                /  [log in to unmask]
International Board Certified Lactation Consultant    /  [log in to unmask]

******************************************************************************