New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Prescriptions for 3 Glasses of Low-Fat Milk a Day Should Be Scaled Back

Armed with new evidence, nutritionists are rallying against dairy-rich diets

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The USDA, the American Academy of Pediatrics and other august institutions recommend that calorie-containing beverages should be limited in people's diets. Pretty much all, that is, except for low-fat milk. The U.S. dairy industry made the “Got milk?” slogan one of the most famous of all time—and standard dietary guidelines embrace that entreaty: three cups a day, less the saturated fat, do well by both child and adult.

Experts are starting to have second thoughts about that recommendation. Less milk than what current daily requirements call for may in fact be more healthful, and forgoing milk altogether may be fine. What's more, even low-fat milk may not be as healthy as commonly believed.

The latest broadside against the most wholesome of foods appeared in July's JAMA Pediatrics, in a commentary from nutrition scientists David Ludwig and Walter Willett of Harvard Medical School. Their rationale is simple: foods with less fat often make you feel less full. The child who drinks low-fat milk but then grabs an extra cookie because of lingering hunger pangs winds up consuming more refined carbohydrates and risks gaining extra pounds. As for the cholesterol-raising saturated fat in whole milk, Ludwig and Willett note that milk fat increases both artery-clogging cholesterol as well as the more beneficial kind, making the whole thing somewhat of a wash.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The authors' antimilk manifesto also has an evolutionary component. Grazing animals evolved to supply milk to their young, keeping them close to protect against predation. But this necessary closeness stops when calves and kids turn into cows and goats. Human adults who chug the preferred drink of suckling grazers thrice daily for decades may not fare so well. A hormone called insulinlike growth factor 1 that is found in milk products has been tied to prostate and other cancers. If bone-strengthening calcium is what you seek, the researchers suggest, you can meet your daily requirements by eating leafy greens, nuts and seeds.

More work remains to be done, but until then, Ludwig and Willett say that milk drinking should not be mandated. And there's no need to seek out the skim carton on the market shelf.

Adapted from Talking Back at blogs.ScientificAmerican.com/talking-back

Gary Stix is the former senior editor of mind and brain topics at Scientific American.

More by Gary Stix
Scientific American Magazine Vol 309 Issue 3This article was published with the title “The Case for Milk Is Going Sour” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 309 No. 3 (), p. 26
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0913-26a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe