bootsie wrote:
Except for the fact that 75 percent of the world's population is lactose-intolerant, thus rendering any of milk's (dubious-at-best) benefits to be entirely moot.
I don't think it is quite that high. But you are correct, for a lot of the world, dairy is not an option. But why should anyone who can tolerate milk factor in others' food intolerances or allergies into their own diets? That makes no sense. It it like someone telling you not to eat what or peanuts because some people have lots of problems with the those foods. If you can consume dairy, and enjoy it, I think it (low-fat versions) can certainly be part of a healthy diet (and many recent studies have shown it to be an excellent recovery aid for endurance athletes due to its combination/ratio of carbs, protein, fat, its water content, and its micronutrients).
For the record, I think that a vegan/vegetarian diet, IF the person is aware of potential deficiencies, can be and often is extremely healthy. Sometimes they have to work a little harder to consumed adequate protein (especially an athlete), but yes, this can certainly be done.
Because of their focus on a wide variety of fruits, veggies, whole gains, and healthy oils, and due to such a diet lending itself well to moderate calorie intake, I would certainly say the average vegetarian/vegan is healthier than the average non-vegetarian/vegan. But this is also due to the fact that someone who makes such a choice is usually more focused on what they are eating and their health to begin with. If such a person added small amounts of low-fat meat, omega-3 rich fish, and low-fat dairy to that already nutritious vegan diet, and I certainly don't think there would be any negative consequences, and probably there would be even advantages (such as improved protein status, some micronutrient improvements, and increased intake of epa/dha)