From: Loren Muldowney <firstname.lastname@example.org.EDU>
Subject: Re: being a heretic...fermentation products
wytze wrowytze wrote:
> Thank you. Now my question is on what grounds it is asserted that this is
(This is in reference to products of fermentation technology)
Two grounds, at least.
1. The purified protein is the same molecule as the native protein.
The general reason for wanting to do this is that it is a less expensive
way to get a given amount of a specific protein, and it allows much
easier control over production. I am not convinced that the consumer
ever sees any benefit of any lower cost, but this does explain why
producers want to use it-to minimize their costs.
Consider the difficulties of having to purify the enzyme from the
stomachs of 1-day-old calves. First is that you slaughter a whole bunch
of newborn calves. Then you have to preserve the tissue so that the
enzymes do not break down. Then you have to get it to the person who is
going to be extracting the enzyme, and then they have to use it right
away and cannot leave it sitting around, whether this is a convenient
time to purify enzyme or not.
Alternatively, the gene which codes for that protein can be inserted
into a bacterium and the bacterium grown as a batch culture. The
bacteria are then producing that calf protein. In such a batch it is
possible to control the rate of growth and production, the temperature,
etc. You don't have to arrange for the acquisition of calf stomachs or
be physically located anywhere near a slaughter facility. You purify
the enzyme out when your culture has grown to the size batch you like to
work with. The purified enzyme, once separated from the constituents of
the batch culture, is the same as the native enzyme separated from the
rest of the calf tissues.
AND my question is, why would we be sacrificing calves? For an enzyme?
To get a protein? And secondly, why are we looking for a substitute? If
we had to use newborn calves for sacrificial and self satisfying reasons
before but now we hope to make it okay by allowing science to side step,
reproduce or otherwise substitute, I think we had all better think about
why we are using the milk and protein/enzyme of another mammal in the
Why do we prefer another mammal's milk long after we are weaned of our
own and why a cow? We don't choose a deer or antelope or lion or giraffe
or camel. A cat or dog seems somehow grotesque.
Even the idea of offering human breastmilk to a child not of the same
genetic pool is seen as somehow wrong. And we don't continue drinking
human milk much past the age of 2. Why not? Because the benefits aren't
there as an adult. The same is true for cow's milk. Milk is a poor
source of protein and calcium. The cost of protein is much cheaper from
plant sources. The calcium from milk is not readily absorbed and may
actually cause osteoporosis. The growth hormones found in milk are quite
dangerous and may alter our own insulin production.
Rather than worry about proteins or enzymes we need to address the issue
that we are treading on territory we were never meant to use, examine,
utilize, benefit? or somehow take advantage of.
I recommend reading, "Milk The Deadly Poison" by Robert Cohen 1998
Argus Publishing Englewood Cliffs NJ ISBN 0-9659196-0-9 or go to
remodeler, drummer, farmer, soapmaker
cutting, banging, sowing and milling!
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 05 2000 - 20:00:34 EDT