Top Scientist Exposes the Real Dangers of Milk: It ‘Turns on Cancer’ and ‘Leaches Calcium from Your Bones’

By Alex Pietrowski | Waking Times

The dairy industry is big business, and globally is ‘expected to generate revenues worth USD 442.32 billion in 2019,’ while the U.S. dairy industry spends up to a billion dollars a year in advertising. With so much money on the line and the continual push by dairy advertisers, it’s difficult to convince people that drinking milk is another one of the false promises of the modern food problem.

So, does milk really do a body good, as the popular advertising campaign suggests?

According to American biochemist Dr. T. Colin Campbell, milk is one of the most harmful foods we are consuming, and he has the scientific research to back up this claim. Warning people that milk ‘turns on cancer’ and ‘leeches calcium from your bones,’ Dr. Campbell is well-known for his influential book, The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted And the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss, And Long-term Health. Based on a 20-year long study conducted by the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine, Cornell University, and the University of Oxford, The China Study documents serious negative implications of consuming milk.

“The China Study examines the link between the consumption of animal products (including dairy) and chronic illnesses such as coronary heart diseasediabetesbreast cancerprostate cancer, and bowel cancer.[3] The authors conclude that people who eat a predominantly whole-food, plant-based diet—avoiding animal products as a main source of nutrition, including beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs, cheese, and milk, and reducing their intake of processed foods and refined carbohydrates—will escape, reduce, or reverse the development of numerous diseases.” [Source]

The study is exceptionally damning to the dairy industry, and while some would like to dismiss Dr. Campbell’s work, his prestigious and influential career gives us good reason to pay attention. Here’s a short snippet from his bio:

For more than forty years, Dr. T. Colin Campbell has been at the forefront of nutrition research. His legacy, the China Project, is the most comprehensive study of health and nutrition ever conducted. Dr. Campbell is a professor Emeritus at Cornell University and is most well-known for co-authoring the bestselling book The China Study with his son, Thomas Campbell, MD. In addition to his long and outstanding career as an author, scientific researcher, and Cornell professor, Dr. Campbell has been featured in several documentary films. He is the founder of the T. Colin Campbell Center for Nutrition Studies and the online internationally-recognized Plant-Based Nutrition Certificate. [Source]

Honing in the main protein found in cow’s milk, casein, Campbell makes the case that it is a serious carcinogen that is having major consequences for public health in America and around the world. Casein

“Casein is the most relevant chemical carcinogen ever identified, make no mistake about it. – Dr. Colin Campbell

What does he base this on?

“What I did during the early part of my career was nothing more than what traditional science would suggest. I made the observation that diets presumably higher in animal protein were associated with liver cancer in the Philippines. When coupled with the extraordinary report from India showing that casein fed to experimental rats at the usual levels of intake dramatically promoted liver cancer, it prompted my 27-year-long study The China Project, of how this effect worked. We did dozens of experiments to see if this was true and, further, how it worked.” ~Dr. Colin Campbell, The China Study

It’s interesting to note that the dairy industry has been telling us for decades that milk is good for the bones because it is full of calcium. But, not unlike the water fluoridation scam, which claims to prevent dental fluorosis but is actually causing it, Campbell says that milk actually makes your bones weaker by leaching calcium from them.

“One thing animal protein does is trigger metabolic acidosis. This happens when the body produces too much acid and becomes very acidic, which can be caused by multiple things, including the absorption of casein found in animal protein. Casein makes up almost 90 percent of the protein in a cow’s milk. When the body experiences this type of acidosis, it actually forces the body to compensate by leaching calcium from the bones to help neutralize the increased acidity. Over time, all of this can have severe and detrimental effects on bone health, and studies have shown this.” [Source]

Regarding casein, along with whey, it is one of the two proteins found in milk, although the body digests each in very different ways.

“There are two types of protein found in dairy products: casein and whey protein. Thirty-eight percent of the solid matter in milk is made of protein. Of that total protein, 80 percent is casein and 20 percent is whey. Cheese is made mostly of casein, where most of the liquid whey found in milk has been filtered or strained out. But all dairy products contain casein, not just cheese. The difference between whey and casein is how they’re digested and how they react in the body.

Because casein digests so slowly, natural morphine-like substances in casein known as casomorphins, act like opiates in the body as they enter the bloodstream. Just minutes after you eat a dairy-based food, the casein protein begins to break down. This releases the drug-like casomorphins, which attach to opiate receptors in the brain and cause severe addictions to dairy products (hence the reason they keep people coming back for more.) Casomorphinstrigger such an addictive response that they’ve been compared to heroin in terms of their strength to cause food addictions and mood disorders.

Casein’s slow digestion rate also puts great strain on the digestive system. Dr. Frank Lipman (an Integrative and Functional Medical expert), explains that the body has an extremely difficult time breaking down casein. Dr. Lipman says that common symptoms of dairy sensitivity due to casein are: excess mucus production, respiratory problems and digestive problems like constipation, gas, bloating, and/or diarrhea. Dairy intolerance is also known to cause skin issues like acne, rashes, and redness or irritation.” [Source]

The following talk by Dr. Campbell discusses in greater detail the dangers of casein.

According to Dr. Campbell’s research, the consumption of casein appears to act almost like an ‘on switch for cancer,’ perhaps contributing in a major way to the cancer epidemic we see today.

“What we learned along the way is that we could turn on and turn off cancer. Turn it on by increasing casein consumption, turn it off by decreasing it or replacing it with plant protein. That was a really exciting thing that we could take nutrition and turn cancer on and off, I mean that, that was pretty startling.” ~Dr. Colin Campbell

The primary reason for this, as Dr. Campbell states, is that the consumption of casein protein tends to create an acidic condition in the body, known as metabolic acidosis, which is widely known to be a primary driver of a litany of diseases and poor health conditions and has even been called a precursor to cancer. Informed nutritionists and holistic physicians have for years been highlighting the importance of eating alkaline foods and working to eliminate the consumption of acidic foods.

A clip from the documentary Forks Over Knives discusses the link between excessive casein consumption, acidosis, and disease.

Is human health is dependent on the consumption of dairy products, or are we better off without them? As big as the dairy industry is, it is not at all difficult to understand that information countering the narrative milk does a body good would be unwelcome to those who make their living on dairy.

About the Author

Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com. Alex is an avid student of Yoga and life.

This article (Top Scientist Exposes the Real Dangers of Milk: It ‘Turns on Cancer’ and ‘Leaches Calcium from Your Bones’originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alex Pietrowski and WakingTimes.com

Grass Fed Dairy Study Shows How Much Better It Really Is

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

If you’ve heard about omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids, you may be aware that while they’re essential human nutrients, consuming too much omega-6s and not enough omega-3s can raise your risk of developing heart disease, obesity and diabetes. The trouble is, the majority of Americans eat 10 to 15 times the amount of omega-6s compared to what they eat in omega-3s.

According to a recent study1 published in Food Science & Nutrition, cows fed a diet based on 100 percent organic grass and legumes produce milk with more omega-3 and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA, another extraordinarily heart-healthy fatty acid), which provides a substantially healthier balance of fatty acids. The improved fatty acid profile in grass fed organic milk and dairy products brings the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio to a near 1-to-1, compared to 5.7-to-1 in conventional whole milk.

Studies have previously determined that eating organic beef or dairy lowers omega-6 intakes and at the same time increases omega-3 intakes as well as CLA, another extraordinarily heart-healthy fatty acid. Collaborative clinical studies conducted in four countries, including the U.S., have concluded that cows on a 100 percent organic grass- and legume-based diet produce milk with higher omega-3 and CLA levels, which makes for more balanced levels of fatty acids.

Undertaken at Newcastle University in England, Southern Cross University in Linsmore, NSW Australia, the University of Minnesota and Johns Hopkins University, the studies further indicated that the superior fatty acid profile in grass fed organic milk and dairy products, which the researchers refer to as “grassmilk,” is far preferable to the ratio of fatty acids found in conventional whole milk. Science Daily noted other benefits:

“Daily consumption of grassmilk dairy products could potentially improve U.S. health trends. In addition to the well-established metabolic and cardiovascular benefits of omega-3 fatty acids and CLA, there are additional benefits for pregnant and lactating women, infants, and children.

Various forms of omega-3 fatty acids play critical roles in the development of eyes, the brain, and the nervous system. Adequate omega-3 intakes can also slow the loss of cognitive function among the elderly.”2

The benefits of consuming grass fed milk over the conventional kind are quite dramatic when you examine the nutritional benefits, because they translate to health in a big way. Study coauthor Charles Benbrook, a visiting scholar at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University, noted the “near-perfect balance of omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids in grassmilk dairy products” in helping consumers find a fairly quick and easy way to reduce their cardiovascular and metabolic disease risks.

Related Article: Beef Industry Rife with Corruption, But New Grassfed Dairy Standard May Help (Be Informed)

How Cow’s Milk Is ‘Managed’ in the U.S

Science Daily noted that the colleagues involved in the study, “Enhancing the Fatty Acid Profile of Milk through Forage-Based Rations, with Nutrition Modeling of Dietary Outcomes,” compared the fatty acid profile of U.S. cow’s milk produced using one of three production systems:

  • “Grassmilk” cows, for the most part, consume a 100 percent organic grass and legume-based diet, which they either forage themselves in pastures or are fed via stored silage or hay.
  • Organic cows’ feed is made up of around 80 percent Dry Matter Intake, aka DMI from forage-based feed, along with 20 percent grain and feed concentrates.
  • Conventional feeding systems for cows consist of around 53 percent DMI and the remaining 47 percent from grain and concentrates, a combination that takes in more than 90 percent of all milk cows in the U.S.

However, Bradley Heins, researcher, associate professor of dairy science at the University of Minnesota and coauthor of the study, suggests that converting from conventional feeding systems to grass-based pasture and forage-feeding to meet increased consumer demand for organic dairy products may boost profitability and market share for producers.

Grass fed milk offers the most omega-3s — 0.05 grams per 100 grams of milk as opposed to the 0.02 grams in conventional milk. That’s a 147 percent increase in omega-3s, making it the obvious choice for anyone interested in eating (and drinking) to benefit their health. As for the omega-6 content, grass fed milk delivers 52 percent less compared to conventional cow’s milk and 36 percent less than organic milk.

Grass fed milk also provides the most CLA, with 0.043 grams per 100 grams of milk compared to 0.019 grams in conventional milk and 0.023 grams in organic. When you do the research and discover such vast differences in the nutritional profiles of milk depending on how it’s “managed,” it doesn’t take long to surmise that the conventional approach to milk production may fast be approaching obsolescence, which has caused a major ripple in the dairy community.

Ripples in the Dairy Industry

It’s probably not hard to see that the dairy industry could be impacted by the release of the nutritional superiority of grass fed over conventionally raised milk, and even the milk wearing an organic label, but the ways it’s been impacted probably weren’t anticipated. However, as the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) observes, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) still has a ban on the interstate sale or distribution of raw milk.

To remedy that, the Real Food Consumer Coalition (RFCC)3 submitted a petition April 26, 2017, requesting that the FDA lift its ban on raw milk and allow raw milk dairy farmers to “distribute unpasteurized milk in interstate commerce, as long as it bears a warning label and instructions for safe handling.” The Coalition calls the present ban an unnecessary burden on family farmers and notes:

“There are only seven states — Montana, Hawaii, Nevada, New Jersey, Louisiana, Iowa and Delaware — where raw milk is expressly illegal. Still, FDA regulations make raw milk contraband whenever it crosses state lines. Even though the threat of federal prosecution has pushed most farmers away from raw milk sales, 3 percent of the public (approximately 9.4 million people) still regularly consume unpasteurized milk.”4

The RFCC contends that raw milk could be a big boost to the economy. In fact, one study found that if Wisconsin had just 100 raw milk dairy farms and each served 50 families, it would pour $10 million into the state’s economy.5 More importantly, such a boost would be the encouragement U.S. farmers in rural areas need, especially since they’ve been closing their proverbial doors at unprecedented rates.

An example from Vermont is cited by National Public Radio (NPR) in an article titled, “As Big Milk Moves In, Family-Owned U.S. Dairy Farms Rapidly Fold.” It tells the story of a small milking farm that went under in early 2017: “They are the last remaining dairy herd in Weathersfield, and they’ll be auctioned off this week. This is a growing trend in the changing dairy industry — in the state and beyond.”6

Between 1950 and 2012, the number of farms with milking cows, NPR reports, plunged from 3.5 million to around 58,000. The problem is that milk prices aren’t high enough to sustain the business. In fact, they’re not much higher than they were 40 years ago, even while the cost of living has risen exponentially. But it’s become a global trend, as something similar is happening in China, Australia and New Zealand.

Related Article: The Dirty Habits of the Dairy Industry and Why Pasteurized Products May Be Worse Than Raw

Meanwhile, Problems Flourish in the Dairy Industry

It’s not just plummeting milk prices that have caused problems. Northeastern farmers are suing their co-op, Dairy Farmers of America, and Dean Foods, the latter being the largest milk producer in the U.S., saying they conspired to monopolize the market and drive down prices, even though it was clear the milk producers involved would have no buyers. According to Bloomberg:

“Dairy farmers are suffering because the companies that send their milk to the grocery store refuse to pay them what it costs them to produce the milk. On the West Coast, cooperatives created to sell dairy products have been accused by their members of pocketing millions of dollars in an elaborate accounting scheme.”7

Tellingly, one dairy co-op even provided suicide hotline numbers to the farmers in its network, according to Valley News,8 based in New Hampshire. Supporting this scenario, a recent NPR article reports that three farmers in one relatively small dairy cooperative took their own lives; most in the industry put it down to the emotional and financial toll, depressed prices, more milk than there is a demand for and lower prices overseas. One farmer noted that he’s making about 75 percent of what he needs in order to breakeven.

While organic dairy farmers are making more money for their product compared to conventional dairy operations, prices are still below production costs. Still, farmers are reluctant to throw in the towel because of an “agrarian imperative” and other factors, from financial pressure to “a sense of powerlessness in an industry where prices are set by the government, combined with social isolation, and a self-reliant spirit that may make them loathe to seek help,” NPR reports.9

OCA notes that for a while organic dairy farmers were selling raw milk directly to consumers, which helped them stay flush through price fluctuations until, it adds, “Organic Valley banned the practice.”10

Why Opt for Raw Grass Fed Milk?

Besides modern testimonials regarding the health advantages of drinking raw organic grass fed milk over cartons of CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation) milk from standard grocery stores, medical books from the early 1900s cite case studies associated with improvements and remedying chronic disease and disorders, including:

Crohn’s disease Asthma
Lyme disease Acne
Urinary tract infections Psoriasis
Migraines Lactose intolerance
Allergies Cancer

A study of around 1,000 infants in rural areas of France, Germany, Finland, Austria and Switzerland followed their milk consumption throughout their first year of life, specifically in regard to the types of cow’s milk they drank and their susceptibility to respiratory infections. Researchers found that those who drank raw milk had a 30 percent lower risk of developing such infections and fever.11

There’s something called the “farm effect” that may help explain why about 50 percent of Americans suffer from allergic sensitization, which makes them more susceptible to allergic disease. Meanwhile, the OCA notes that the Amish, 80 percent of whom purportedly drink raw milk compared to 3 percent of Americans at large, are among the least allergic populations in the developed world.

“In Europe, the consumption of unpasteurized milk also correlates with protection against allergic disease. European children who consume raw milk have more T-cells, which help the immune system restrain itself when facing substances that are not true threats. A healthy population of these and other ‘suppressor’ cells is important in preventing allergies and asthma. The higher the quantity of those cells, the less likely is a diagnosis of asthma.”12

The implication is that the “farm effect” is synonymous with a “raw milk effect,” as children’s immune systems seem to be protected, especially when they’re young, when they’re exposed to raw milk and microbes commonly found on farms.

That’s one reason why the OCA is asking the FDA to acknowledge the health advantages of raw milk and to begin allowing dairy farmers to produce and distribute unpasteurized milk via interstate commerce, even as it complies with warning labels and safe handling instructions. If you’re interested in helping with this endeavor, here’s your chance. Click here to ask the FDA to lift its ban on raw milk.

Related Article: Big Dairy Continues War Against Farmers & Raw Milk

Help Support GMO Labeling

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is safe and beneficial, and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that genetically modified organisms, aka GMOs or genetically engineered (GE) foods, help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I’ve stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

The FDA — which considers “genetic engineered” to be the more precise term — cleared the way for GE Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it’s imperative ALL GE foods be labeled, which is currently still being denied.

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity. Thankfully, we have organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) to fight back against these corporate giants. So, please, fight for your right to know what’s in your food and help support the GMO labeling movement by making a donation today.

Donations TRIPLE-Matched During GMO Awareness Week

I have found very few organizations that are as effective and efficient as OCA. It’s a public interest organization dedicated to promoting health and sustainability. OCA and I thank you for everything you’ve done to further this cause, and hope you stick with us as we move forward. I strongly encourage you to give OCA your financial support, because we are making a huge difference.

Food companies have to start being honest and truthful in telling us what’s in our food, and we will not quit until they do. We can’t do it alone, however. We need your help and, this week, you can seriously maximize the impact of your generosity, because I will match each and every dollar you donate to the OCA with $3, up to $250,000.

Non-GMO Food Resources

As consumers worldwide become increasingly aware of the problems linked to GE crops and the toxic chemicals and pesticides used on them, more and more people are proactively refusing to eat these foods. There’s also strong growth in the global organic and grass fed sectors. This just proves one thing: We can make a difference if we steadily work toward the same goal. I recommend visiting these trustworthy sites for non-GMO food resources in your country:

Organic Food Directory (Australia) Eat Wild (Canada)
Organic Explorer (New Zealand) Eat Well Guide (United States and Canada)
Farm Match (United States) Local Harvest (United States)
Weston A. Price Foundation (United States) The Cornucopia Institute

Monsanto and its allies want you to think that they control everything, but they do not. It’s you, the masses, who hold the power in your hands. Let’s all work together to topple the biotech industry’s house of cards. Remember — it all starts with shopping smart and making the best food purchases for you and your family.

Read more great articles at mercola.com

New Study Shows Dietary Calcium Does Not Prevent Bone Loss (Breaks 50 Year Myth)

dairy products. cheese, milk, sour cream

By Marco Torres | Prevent Disease

Dairy products, specifically milk is one of the beverages still aggressively pushed as a health promoting food, especially relating to strong bones. However, Bone Mineral Density (BMD) and rates of bone loss showed no association with dietary calcium intake in men, according to a recent study in British Journal of Nutrition.

The dairy industy has been hard at work the last 50 years convincing people that pasteurized dairy products such as milk or cheese increases bioavailable calcium levels. Many studies have exposed this claim as being totally false. The pasteurization process only creates calcium carbonate, which has absolutely no way of entering the cells without a chelating agent. So what the body does is pull the calcium from the bones and other tissues in order to buffer the calcium carbonate in the blood. This process actually causes osteoporosis.

Pasteurized dairy contains too little magnesium needed at the proper ratio to absorb the calcium. Most would agree that a minimum amount of Cal. to Mag Ratio is 2 to 1 and preferably 1 to 1. So milk, at a Cal/Mag ratio of 10 to 1, has a problem. You may put 1200 mg of dairy calcium in your mouth, but you will be lucky to actually absorb a third of it into your system.

Over 99% of the body’s calcium is in the skeleton, where it provides mechanical rigidity. Pasteurized dairy forces a calcium intake lower than normal and the skeleton is used as a reserve to meet needs. Long-term use of skeletal calcium to meet these needs leads to osteoporosis.

For years, US guidelines have advised men and women to take anywhere from 1,000 to 1,200 mg of calcium per day to help prevent fractures and improve bone density. This likely lasted for so long due to an overreliance on studies from the 1970s and 1980s.

Does Not Reduce Bone Loss

Increased dietary calcium intake did not significantly reduce bone loss in the hip, spine or total body in a group of men aged 39-88, reported the research team from University of Auckland.

No correlation was observed between calcium intake and BMD either at baseline, or at the end of the study period. Although dietary calcium intake was inversely related to parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels at baseline, indicators of bone turnover were uncorrelated with calcium intake.

“Bone loss over 2 years was not related to Ca intake at any site, before or after adjustment [forconfounding variables],” wrote first author, Dr. Sarah Bristow.

“Dietary calcium intake was inversely correlated with PTH at baseline, but was not associated with the markers of bone turnover.”

The findings may have important implications for osteoporosis prevention strategies, where increased dietary or supplemental calcium intake has previously been recommended.

“This suggests that efforts to increase calcium intake are unlikely to have an impact on the prevalence of and morbidity from male osteoporosis,” the researchers propose.

“Many of the messages being promulgated at the present time are based on the findings of calcium-balance studies and the short-term effects of high-dose calcium interventions, which do not reflect those of long-term dietary intake.

“Messages to increase dietary calcium could be directing at-risk individuals away from considering interventions and strategies proven to influence long-term fracture risk.”

Study Detail

The study used data from a previous Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) which examined the effect on BMD in 323 males given either 1200 milligrams/day (mg/d), 650 mg/d or placebo of calcium over two years. Data from the placebo group (n=99) were used in longitudinal analysis.

Although the earlier RCT found that the 1200 mg/d dose improved BMD by around 1%, this effect was achieved in the first 6 months, with no further subsequent improvement in the remaining 18 months.

These results prompted the researchers to hypothesise that short-term calcium intakes from high-dose calcium interventions are unrepresentative of longer-term dietary intake. The findings of the recent longitudinal study support this hypothesis.

They are also consistent with previous research indicating a similar lack of association between calcium intake and bone loss in women.
Contradictory results?

The researchers suggested the lack of association between calcium intake and BMD might be because the body is able to maintain calcium homeostasis over (long-term) typical dietary ranges (415-1740 mg/d).

Observational study findings appear to contradict supplementation RCTs, which have shown small increases in BMD, coupled with reductions in PTH and bone turnover. However, BMD improvements identified in RCTs have only occurred in the first year with no further cumulative effect.

This may be because short-term high doses of calcium induce a temporary reduction in bone turnover, which does not persist once steady-state calcium homeostasis is restored, suggested the researchers.

“Collectively, evidence from intervention and observational studies suggests long-term calcium intake doesn’t influence the rate of bone loss, but large increases in calcium intake induce a transient change,” they wrote.

The scientists emphasised that the study was conducted in Caucasian males with adequate vitamin D status. Therefore, results may not be applicable to other ethnic groups or those with vitamin D deficiency.

“The present demonstration of an absence of an effect of dietary calcium intake on current bone mass or on bone loss in normal men, together with the absence of an effect of calcium intake on bone turnover, contributes to the body of evidence suggesting that calcium intake, within the range studied here, is not a critical factor in the maintenance of bone health in older adults” the authors concluded.


1. Eat calcium rich foods
Eat foods high in calcium. The best food sources are non-pasteurized raw dairy sources such as raw milk/yogurt, as well as bony fish, such as sardines. Leafy green veg such as kale, broccoli and spinach are also rich in calcium. Dried herbs and dried fruits such as figs and currants are also good choices. Seeds such as sesame, chia and flax are also rich sources of calcium. Also, enjoy foods that contain sulfur such as garlic and onions.

2. Food selections/combinations are critical
Try not to eat whole grains and calcium-rich foods at the same time. Whole grains contain a substance that binds with calcium and prevents proper absorption. Some foods that contain compounds such as oxalic or phytic acids, such as sweet potatoes, beans, rhubarb, celery and beets, can also decrease the amount of calcium that’s absorbed when eaten at the same time as calcium-rich foods.

3. Avoid the causes of mineral excretion
Pass on phosphate-containing foods such as soft drinks. Phosphorus causes the body to excrete calcium. Limit or avoid high-protein animal foods. A diet high in protein causes calcium to be excreted from your body. Decrease caffeine consumption. People who smoke have significantly lower bone density, while drinking alcohol can also prevent your bones from absorbing the maximum nutrients from your food.

4. Get more Sunlight and Vitamin D 
Vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium. Although some is found in oily fish, our main source comes from the effect of sunlight on your skin. It’s estimated that half of us have a deficiency because we don’t get outside enough or because we always use sunblock. It is especially important to maximize sun exposure between May and September to keep vitamin D levels topped up. Just 10 minutes of sunlight a day on bare arms and your face can cut your risk of bone fractures by a third. A half hour exposing your torso is equivalent to roughly 10,000 units of Vitamin D.

5. The right exercise
Another vital way to boost your bones is weight-bearing exercise –basically anything that has you upright and using your body weight. Good choices include squatting, rope skipping, aerobics, plyometrics, dancing or brisk walking. “Research shows that if you don’t exercise you end up weeing out all the calcium you take in instead of storing it in your bones,” warns Professor Dawn Skelton, an aging and health specialist at Glasgow Caledonian University. “Ideally we should aim for 150 minutes of moderate activity per week. “Put simply, the more hours we spend on our feet, the fewer bone breakages we should have in later life.”

6. Avoid Medications and Medical Therapies
Acid-blocking medications used for heartburn and other gastrointestinal conditions can block the absorption of calcium through the stomach walls. Stomach acids break down food during the digestive process, allowing the nutrients to become absorbed into your body. Medications designed to stop acid production or decrease the amount of acids present in your stomach can have a negative effect on calcium.


Read more great articles at Prevent Disease.