Why is the standard milk now Low Fat

amacachi

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

There are 640 calories in a litre of full fat milk.

Kinda irrelevant, I'm the only person I know who would regularly drink a litre of milk in one go.

KKkitty

Full fat all the way. Ya might as well be pulling the udder one with the low fat version

Seomra Mushie

I usually hate low-fat versions of products but milk is one I really don't mind, as there is nothing added to replace the fat that has been removed, plus some fat is left in there. Also, low-fat milk is higher in calcium as the calcium in the non-fat part, so per litre there will be more than in whole milk.

Whole milk is lovely but to be honest I like low-fat milk too. I grew up with it and am used to it.

Now, skimmed? Skimmed milk is absolute muck.

Jordan 199

I drink Malk.

Seomra Mushie

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

There are 640 calories in a litre of full fat milk.

There's 480 in a litre of low-fat. Not a huge difference really, esp if that litre is split between a few people.

snubbleste

Milk is so good.
It has as much potassium in a glass as 41 bananas and helps your muscles recover twice as fast from exercise as a sports drink.

Seomra Mushie

clintondaly wrote: »

In order to turn Full Fat(3.5%) into low fat you need to remove all that is good about it,you are then left with low fat which has little or no Vitamins etc.

Low-fat has more calcium, as calcium is in the contained in the non-fat part.

Then again, maybe other vitamins and minerals are in the fat part.

I dunno, I like both whole milk and low-fat, and both have their benefits.

dmc17 wrote: »

Exactly and you see them coming out of the chipper with a bag of burgers and a can of diet coke

I think some people just genuinely prefer diet coke to regular, so it might not be in the interests of health necessarily.

TheZohanS

Don't really like the taste of low fat milk or skimmed milk, but the Avonmore low fat Supermilk is lovely, tastes like full fat milk.

Micky Dolenz

amacachi wrote: »

Kinda irrelevant, I'm the only person I know who would regularly drink a litre of milk in one go.

How many peoples diet are you aware of though?

I'd drink 2 litres a day no problem and I often see people with pints of milk for lunch.

Sindri

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

How many peoples diet are you aware of though?

I'd drink 2 litres a day no problem and I often see people with pints of milk for lunch.

It's a very culchie thing, too see guys out for night in the chippers asking for a carton of milk.

TeddyTedson

TheZohan wrote: »

Don't really like the taste of low fat milk or skimmed milk, but the Avonmore low fat Supermilk is lovely, tastes like full fat milk.

They only made it low fat about 2 years ago. I want the fat:mad:

amacachi

TheZohan wrote: »

Don't really like the taste of low fat milk or skimmed milk, but the Avonmore low fat Supermilk is lovely, tastes like full fat milk.

I find supermilk very sweet and watery tbh.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

How many peoples diet are you aware of though?

I'd drink 2 litres a day no problem and I often see people with pints of milk for lunch.

A pint (in Ireland? thought it was only half-litres available now) isn't a litre. Good to meet a fellow milk fan though.

westendgirlie

I don't get what some posters are saying about more calcium in low fat. In full fat, do they remove some of the calcium to make room for the fat?

I would of thought the calcium content was the same in a litre regardless of the fat content ???

amacachi

Sindri wrote: »

It's a very culchie thing, too see guys out for night in the chippers asking for a carton of milk.

A litre or half-litre?

Caraville

I only really like skimmed milk, but that's only because I find the full fat milk too creamy, nothing to do with the fat content. Sure most people only use a drop for tea/coffee or at most for cereal so you'd hardly be having so much as it'd make a difference fat/calorie wise. I'd use full fat milk for my tea no problem though if that's all was there.

amacachi

westendgirlie wrote: »

I don't get what some posters are saying about more calcium in low fat. In full fat, do they remove some of the calcium to make room for the fat?

I would of thought the calcium content was the same in a litre regardless of the fat content ???

Milk starts off as full fat and they remove fat. By removing the fat you're left with less volume than was started with so to put it back up more has to be added.

Suppose (made up numbers here) a litre of milk at 3.5% fat has 10mg of calcium. By removing the fat there's now only (roughly) 965ml so another 35ml has to be added so instead of 10mg of calcium per litre there would be about 10.3mg per litre.
Supermilk and the like has vitamins and minerals added to it I think.

Micky Dolenz

amacachi wrote: »

I find supermilk very sweet and watery tbh.

A pint (in Ireland? thought it was only half-litres available now) isn't a litre. Good to meet a fellow milk fan though.

A person could easily have two half litres in the course of a day. My point still stands, there are 640 calories in a litre, if you drink more or less, do the math.

Gummy Panda

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

amacachi wrote: »

I find supermilk very sweet and watery tbh.

A pint (in Ireland? thought it was only half-litres available now) isn't a litre. Good to meet a fellow milk fan though.

A person could easily have two half litres in the course of a day. My point still stands, there are 640 calories in a litre, if you drink more or less, do the math.

Then don't drink your calories?

Scanlas The 2nd

amacachi wrote: »

westendgirlie wrote: »

I don't get what some posters are saying about more calcium in low fat. In full fat, do they remove some of the calcium to make room for the fat?

I would of thought the calcium content was the same in a litre regardless of the fat content ???

Milk starts off as full fat and they remove fat. By removing the fat you're left with less volume than was started with so to put it back up more has to be added.

Suppose (made up numbers here) a litre of milk at 3.5% fat has 10mg of calcium. By removing the fat there's now only (roughly) 965ml so another 35ml has to be added so instead of 10mg of calcium per litre there would be about 10.3mg per litre.
Supermilk and the like has vitamins and minerals added to it I think.

A lot of the calcium in milk isn't absorbable, green veg like kale is much better at providing your body with calcium. I read somewhere that milk could actually remove calcium from your bones.

stupidusername

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

A person could easily have two half litres in the course of a day. My point still stands, there are 640 calories in a litre, if you drink more or less, do the math.

Considering you're drinking that much liquid it's not that bad. The calories in a litre of sprite is 440. And milk undoubtedly has better nutrition. Besides calories aren't evil things.

Micky Dolenz

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Then don't drink your calories?

I am training at the moment so need the calories and know how many calories are in most things I eat or drink. Lots of people don't drink full fat milk for the opposite reason.

tayto lover

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I like all my dairy products full fat. I hate these god dam health freaks trying to push their agenda on us. We don't all want to live till were 90 you know.:mad::mad::D

89 year olds do.

Seomra Mushie

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I'd drink 2 litres a day no problem and I often see people with pints of milk for lunch.

In my waitressing days in a pub, lads especially were mad for pints of milk with their dinner

stupidusername

Seomra Mushie wrote: »

In my waitressing days in a pub, lads especially were mad for pints of milk with their dinner

I'd have felt weird asking for that,but I may do so!

Gummy Panda

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Then don't drink your calories?

I am training at the moment so need the calories and know how many calories are in most things I eat or drink. Lots of people don't drink full fat milk for the opposite reason.

You doing GOMAD?

Seomra Mushie

westendgirlie wrote: »

I don't get what some posters are saying about more calcium in low fat. In full fat, do they remove some of the calcium to make room for the fat?

I would of thought the calcium content was the same in a litre regardless of the fat content ???

Think about it for a minute. Milk has its fat component and its non-fat watery component. It's not that they remove calcium to make for fat, it's that calcium is contained in the non-fat part of milk so a litre of low-fat has a lower fat component so will contain more non-fat component and therefore more calcium than a litre of whole milk.

Micky Dolenz

Gummy Panda wrote: »

You doing GOMAD?

No.That is interesting though.

I'm just burning a lot of calories lately.

tayto lover

Proof that milk is good for you
<snip- nipple shot>

danslevent

It's kind of odd when you think about it that we drink cow's milk. It's yummy and all be is meant for calves, not humans really. Isn't it kind of strange that humans are the only animals on earth that drink milk produced by another animal?

amacachi

danslevent wrote: »

It's kind of odd when you think about it that we drink cow's milk. It's yummy and all be is meant for calves, not humans really. Isn't it kind of strange that humans are the only animals on earth that drink milk produced by another animal?

Cats and dogs often consume cow's milk.