What is A2/A2 milk and why it’s better for your body

written by

posted on

October 4, 2019

There are an array of confusing and subjective food labels in stores - Prime, Choice or Select beef, Grade A or Grade B maple syrup, free range or pastured eggs, etc. These labels are all based on a human making a subjective assessment of the product. The lines that divide each are blurry.

**When it comes to milk, the A2/A2 label is objective and scientific.**

A2/A2 milk is milk that contains 100% A2 beta-casein protein. It’s a genetic thing. The farmer takes a cow’s hair sample and sends it to a lab. The labs sends back results that show whether the cow produces 100% A2/A2 milk, a mix of A1/A2 milk, or 100% A1/A1 milk. It’s objective. The line is clear.

It took a couple of years and was expensive for our farmer to convert his herd to 100% A2/A2 cows. It’s a pretty special farm with a pretty special farmer.

So why should we care? Well, modern American milk is unnatural. We’re not supposed to digest anything other than A2 beta-casein protein.

All mammals - humans, sheep, goats, dogs, camels, mice, whales, lions, platypuses, etc - produce milk that contains 100% A2 beta-casein protein. As mammals, it’s what we’re born to digest. It’s natural.

However, the situation with cows is unique. A few thousand years ago, there was a genetic mutation in cows in Europe (this was probably due to the stress of farming becoming industrialized). This mutation made cows produce a new type of beta-casein protein - A1.

Those European cows made their way to the United States. Now, any milk you buy in an American supermarket will be A1/A2 - organic or not.

Evolution is a long term process. A few thousand years in not enough time for humans or cows to evolve to digest A1 protein. We’d need a million years for that.

Will it hurt me if I drink A1/A2 milk? Maybe, maybe not.

Every body is different. It seems that some bodies can handle the A1 beta-casein protein, some cannot tolerate it at all, and some don’t have obvious allergy-like symptoms but A1 is the underlying cause of chronic issues.

Cows in Asia - the ones with the hump on their back - were not affected by a genetic mutation. They all produce 100% A2/A2 milk. I’ve heard many stories of people moving from Asia to the United States and developing really chronic issues that, after many doctors hypotheses were debunked, were resolved by switching to A2/A2 milk.

Is there any science behind this? Yes, there is. The research so far shows that consuming A1 beta-casein protein can cause a variety of issues.

Your body needs protein. Enzymes break protein down into amino acids, which are then absorbed into your bloodstream and used to build and repair things in your body like your skin and muscles. Super important.

The A1 beta-casein protein breaks down into a peptide called BCM7. As stated in an article in the Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, “BCM7 is suggested to be associated as a risk factor for human health hazards as it can potentially affect numerous opioid receptors in the nervous, endocrine and immune system.”

The list of chronic health issues related to BCM7 is very long and very varied. It includes type-1 diabetes, heart disease, SIDS, autism, schizophrenia, and gastrointestinal problems.

A2/A2 milk has nothing to do with lactose intolerance.

Lactose intolerance is when the body either does not produce or does not produce enough lactase. Lactase is the enzyme the body uses to breakdown lactose, the sugar in milk. Raw milk naturally has beneficial microbes that help your body produce lactase, so that may be the solution for folks whose bodies produce little lactase. But A2/A2 milk will not help.

That being said, if you have a general intolerance to milk, A2/A2 could be the solution.

It’s important to note that more research is needed on the A1/A2 debate.

Compared to other medical topics, the research on A2/A2 milk is scant. We need more! We need large scale, blinded and controlled studies.

What we do have is lots of anecdotal stories of people who cannot tolerate A1/A2 milk but do just fine with 100% A2/A2 milk.

So what do you think? Do you notice a difference when drinking A2/A2 milk? Why do you choose A2/A2?

SHOP A2/A2 DAIRY HERE

Raw Dairy

Health and Nutrition

Raw milk or fermented dairy and lactose intolerance. Why might it help?

I was misinformed. At some point, I read that raw milk contains lactase. As it turns out, this is not true! It is true that raw milk contains many live enzymes that are inactivated during pasteurization. But, what about lactase? I’ve heard many anecdotal stories from people who are lactose intolerant... but can handle raw milk or fermented dairy. If raw milk, yogurt, kefir, or cheese doesn’t contain lactase, then why is that?

Our bone broth tested negative-ish for heavy metals 🥳 NATURAL AND CLEAN

Over the past few months a bunch of people asked us if we tested our bone broth for toxic heavy metals. When we get the same question a lot, we of course look into it. My first question was --- Is there an issue with toxic metals in bone broth? As it turns out, yes, there "can" be an issue! Heavy metals are naturally present in our environment. We need the "good" heavy metals to thrive: iron, zinc, magnesium, copper, etc. But, we can 100% do without the toxic heavy metals: arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, etc. Too many toxic heavy metals can lead to a host of pretty awful issues: nervous system damage, cardiovascular issues, cancer, endocrine disruption, kidney damage, and so on. Our body is designed to excrete heavy metals through urine (and a little bit through sweat, hair, and breastmilk too)... but only so much. There's a limit. If you're overloaded, your body will store those heavy metals in your bones, blood, tissues, and organs. Similarly, if an animal is exposed to heavy metals via food, water, air, dust, or soil, those heavy metals accumulate in the bones. Maybe the farm's soil or air is contaminated from a nearby factory. Maybe the pipes for the water has lead solder connecting them. Maybe the feed a farm is buying was grown on contaminated soil or processed on contaminated equipment. And, of course, a main purpose of bone broth is drawing out as much as possible from the bones. If there are heavy metals in bones, they will make their way into the broth. This is especially true when you pre-soak with apple cider vinegar and simmer for 48 hours to make it thick and gelatinous (like our broth). And that led me to my second question --- Should I be concerned about every bone broth? Where is the fear coming from? Well... it seems it might be a little political. There was a study done in the UK in 2013 that scared a lot of people. It's titled "The Risk of Lead Contamination in Bone Broth Diets". This study found high levels of lead in organic chicken bone broth, which is quite concerning. And, in fact, this one study is still cited in articles written today! Let's dig a little deeper. Let's go farther than the short abstract. Here are the broths tested in the study and their test results for lead: (9.5 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus skin and cartilage(7.01 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus bones(2.3 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus meat(0.89 parts per billion): Tap water alone cooked for the same amount of time as a control. But, they only used organic chicken from one farm. And, there's zero information about that farm, their practices, the feed, and the broth recipe. Did they use vinegar or wine in the broth? Was the chicken's water contaminated with lead? What was the quality of the feed and the soil? Were the chickens raised indoors or outdoors? So many unanswered questions! All we get is that it was one "organic chicken" that created a lead issue with broth. Another curious thing is that the broth with skin and cartilage contained more lead than the broth made with just bones. Bones are where lead is stored, so why wouldn't the broth made with bones only contain more lead? It's an odd result. Moreover, the abstract of the study specifically called out "bone broth diets" like GAPS and paleo. They even go so far as to write, "In view of the dangers of lead consumption to the human body, we recommend that doctors and nutritionists take the risk of lead contamination into consideration when advising patients about bone broth diets." That's quite curious. Why are they worried about these diets? Are the researchers anti healing through food? Who funded the research? Is it political? My opinion? This study is not comprehensive. It does not speak to all bone broths. But it does cover a potential issue if the water or animals are overloaded with heavy metals. What I glean from this study is that we need more research. We don't need fear to spread and people to stop drinking broth from this one study. Regardless of whether the fear was fabricated or legit, we tested our bone broth anyway. After all, it's always nice to validate that your food choices are as clean as you think. For Miller's, here were my concerns before testing: What if there's mercury in the fishmeal in our chicken feed?What if the soil that our animals live on is contaminated?What is the well water that the broth is made with is contaminated?What if the Celtic sea salt has lots of heavy metals? We got the test results back. I was super excited. But, I was also confused. At face value, it appeared that our bone broth tested NEGATIVE for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. You can find the test results right here! You'll notice that, for every sample, the results are "<0.01 mg/kg" and "<0.02 mg/kg". I asked the lab what the "<" means. They said that it indicates their limit of quantitation (LOQ), the lowest concentration that can be accurately tested using the test procedure in that sample type. So the results simply report that none of the metals tested were found in the sample above the specific reporting LOQs. Whether or not they were present below this LOQ is information that is not provided by the test. When talking to the lab, I told them what we needed and assumed that this test would go below a 1 ppb. So, when the results came in, I assumed that a "mg/kg" was the same as a part per billion (ppb). Ummm... that math wasn't write! A "mg/kg" is actually a part per million (ppm). That means that the test we ran had results saying that the broth had less than 0.02 ppm (or 20 ppb) of arsenic and lead. And, it had less than 0.01 ppm (or 10 ppb) of cadmium and mercury. For some reference, the EPA says that less than 15 ppb of lead is safe in drinking water. Not saying that I agree, but it's a good reference point. These results are good. It means the broth definitely isn't overloaded with toxic heavy metals. But, it's not good enough!!! We need to test again! We really need to a lower LOQ. We need to know the results with an accuracy of as low as 1 ppb. It looks like the lab we sent the original samples to doesn't have an LOQ that low. So here I am on the hunt for a lab to do it again. As soon as I can, I'll send samples in again and paying for more expensive testing to get the info you deserve. Stay tuned! I hope to have the new results in by the end of April 2025. Do you worry about toxic metals (or other junk) in your food? Where have your fears stemmed from? I'd love to hear from you. You can comment below (no account required) or contact us 😊 ----- Sources The risk of lead contamination in bone broth dietsBone Broth and Lead Toxicity: Should You Be Concerned?Bone Broth and Lead Contamination: A Very Flawed Study in Medical HypothesesBone Broth, Collagen, and Toxic Metals: A Research Review

Celebrating the Heritage of Corn on National Popcorn Lovers Day

You've probably heard a lot about GMO corn and its controversies, but did you know that corn, or maize as many Native Americans call it, is a cherished heritage food? Let's take a closer look at corn and learn about its history.