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

Our bone broth tested A+++ for heavy metals 🥳 NATURAL AND CLEAN

*Originally published on 3/14/25. Updated on 4/15/25. 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 body. Depending on the metal, it can accumulate in the bones, muscle, skin, brain, etc. 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 use apple cider vinegar to draw everything out and make it thick and gelatinous and nutrient rich (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. And, as we know, our poor planet is becoming more and more contaminated with toxins like these toxic heavy metals 😢 What I glean from this study is that we need more research. We need to stay vigilant and test from time to time. 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 actually tested twice. As it turns out, the first test results from March had a LOQ (limit of quantification) that was to high. So, we sent new products in April for testing at a lower LOQ. The results are in! Our bone broth tested A+++ for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. You can find the actual Eurofins test results right here! For easy reference, here's a chart summarizing the results: You'll notice that, for every sample, the results are "<2.0 μg/kg" and "<4.0 μg/kg". The "<" indicates the limit of quantification (LOQ), the lowest concentration that can be accurately tested using the test procedure in that sample type. So if a "<" result appears, it means that none of that metal was found in the sample above the specific reporting LOQ. Whether or not they were present below this LOQ is information that's not provided by the test. It's also important to note that a μg/kg is a part per billion (ppb). So, for 1 μg/kg, in every billion grams of that food, there would be one gram (or 0.0000001%) of that particular heavy metal. The small numbers matter when it comes to toxic heavy metals, since it doesn't take all that much for your body to become inundated and start experiencing issues or damage. These results are excellent. It means the broth definitely isn't overloaded with toxic heavy metals and are within safe levels. Our amazing customers mentioned Mike Adams to me numerous times after we released the first set of broth results. Mike Adams is an outspoken consumer health advocate, investigative journalist, activist, and science lab director. It turns out Eurofins, the lab we used, is a lab that he recommends. Moreover, our results land us in his highest rating when it comes to heavy metals! I think we're doing pretty great when it comes to providing clean, natural food. But, one result did make me pause. You might be thinking what I first thought -- "But wait, you got a reading above 4.0 μg/kg for arsenic. Isn't that bad?" Let's dive in -- What's up with arsenic? First off, it's important to note that there are organic forms of arsenic as well as inorganic forms. Our body can handle the organic kind pretty well. But, the inorganic kind is carcinogenic. Our test results show the level of all arsenic, and it doesn't divide inorganic and organic. Second, as you can see from the Health Ranger rating above, your body can tolerate way more arsenic than the other three toxic heavy metals. It can handle 6x more than cadmium, 25x more than lead, and 103x more than mercury. Third, it was a mystery to me how arsenic had a reading in the ground beef but not the beef bone broth. Thankfully, that has a pretty easy explanation. Whereas lead mainly accumulates in the bones, arsenic accumulates more in the organs and muscles. And, of course, meat is muscle. And finally, it was also quite perplexing how arsenic showed in our beef as well as our chicken. You see, our beef and chicken are grown on two separate farms (hours apart) and are processed at two separate processors (also hours apart). They're fed two completely separate diets, too! My only explanation is farmland in general or maybe even our environment in general. Organic arsenic has always been naturally present in the soil and water. It's just there in small amounts. But, levels nowadays are likely higher due to overuse of products laden with inorganic arsenic over time. Starting in the 1940s, conventional farmers would include drugs filled with inorganic arsenic in the feed for pigs and chickens and turkeys to encourage fast growth and prevent disease. Ugh. This actually led to concerns about arsenic poisoning, and that that practice was banned recently, in 2016. It makes me think that all the agri-waste has contaminated our farmland a bit, perhaps in both the soil and water. And then of course there are synthetic pesticides and herbicides and fertilizers that may contain inorganic arsenic. And their use on conventional farms might runoff everywhere else. Since our meats are grown on farms that have been naturally managed for some time, I think that's why our arsenic levels were so low, especially compared to conventional meat. Now, let's compare our results to food in general. Ours are extremely low. The data below is based on a few scientific studies: Arsenic: Rice contains anywhere from 90-450 ppb (that includes that rice cereal for babies, too). Meat and poultry in general typically contain 100-200 ppb. The max ours has is 6.8 ppb.Cadmium: Spinach contains 117-222 ppb. Rice contains 6-19 ppb. Meat and poultry in general contain about 10 ppb. Our has less than 2 ppb.Lead: Meat and poultry in general contain about 25 ppb. Our has less than 4 ppb.Mercury: The larger the fish, the more time it has to accumulate mercury. Swordfish and king mackerel can have about 1,000 ppb. Meat and poultry in general contain about 10-50 ppb. Ours has less than 2ppb. Wow! Putting that into perspective, it looks like our broth and meat are quite clean and extremely low in toxic heavy metals! Are you satisfied with our heavy metal results? Do you think we should take further action? Should we test other products? 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 ReviewInorganic arsenic toxicosis in a beef herd Consumer Wellness Center Labs Heavy Metal RatingsArsenic in Meat and Animal ProductsInorganic arsenic toxicosis in a beef herdArsenic in brown rice: do the benefits outweigh the risks?A Survey of the Levels of Selected Metals in U.S. Meat, Poultry, and Siluriformes Fish Samples Taken at Slaughter and Retail, 2017–2022Arsenic in your foodDietary exposure to cadmium from six common foods in the United StatesMercury Content in Commercially Available Finfish in the United States Author links open overlay panel

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?

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.