I started a friendly debate with a friend recently over IGF-1 and milk.
We know milk contains Insulin growth Factor 1 - IGF-1 that multiplies cancer cells rapidly.
He's arguments is that it's not possible for IGF-1 to survive human digestion and find its way into the bloodstream, where it could bind with the relevant receptors and possibly have detrimental effects.
His point is that proteins that become denatured, no longer function in their intended capacity. IGF-1 being one such example. It is a type of hormone known as a peptide hormone. Given that anything that passes through the digestive tract is broken down by various digestive enzymes and exposed to the harsh acidic conditions within that environment (hydrochloric acid of PH 1 - 3 in the stomach) and detox of the liver, the fragile structure of a protein would never survive. Unless it can reach the bloodstream intact, it cannot follow its signalling pathway and reach its target receptors. Even hormones that are put into the bloodstream will, to some extent, bind to other proteins called globulins, only free hormones are biologically active.
So he's saying that IGF-1 gets broken down and destroyed completely, and that's why diabetics have to inject insulin (also a peptide hormone), in order for it to reach the bloodstream intact it must be injected. If this were not the case all type-1 diabetics would be able to take a pill.
It makes sense, so even though I believe milk drinking to be pathogenic, and I am 100% 80/10/10 raw vegan, does he have a point here? Could IGF-1 really multiply cancer cells when ingested?
Read the above article, its backed by scientific studies. His argument is common and spread throughout by the powerful dairy industry. The truth is that IGF-1 from milk really does multiply cancer cells the science is clear on that.
The evidence of a strong link between cancer risk and a high level of IGF-1 is now indisputable. The question is why do some people have high levels while others do not? Is it all genetically ordained or could it be that diet or some other outside factor influences IGF-1 levels? Dr. Samuel Epstein of the University of Illinois is one scientist who strongly believes so. His 1996 article in the International Journal of Health Sciences clearly warned of the danger of high levels of IGF-1 contained in milk from cows injected with synthetic bovine growth hormone (rBGH). He postulated that IGF-1 in rBGH-milk could be a potential risk factor for breast and gastrointestinal cancers(13).
Consultants paid by Monsanto claimed that IGF-1 would be completely broken down by digestive
enzymes and therefore would have no biological activity in humans(16). Other
researchers disagree with this claim and have warned that IGF-1 may not be
totally digested and that some of it could indeed make its way into the colon
and cross the intestinal wall into the bloodstream. This is of special concern
in the case of very young infants and people who lack digestive enzymes or
suffer from protein-related allergies(13,14,20,22,25).
I think the matter that we should be concerned is how normal milk can be a powerful carcinogenic by itself. Just because in USA and some other countries it's used The recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone on cows and that can increase the IGF-1 levels. Doesn't mean that is safe to consume cow's milk free from IGF-1.
Casein the protein from milk as it was show on Dr. Campbell studies(The China Study book) can be a powerful carcinogenic element by itself, if we apply the same protocols that we apply to carcinogenic elements. Countries that do consume more animal protein are those ones that have more cancer, if is that you are worried about IGF-1, milk has animal protein, regardless of whether it has IGF-1 or not.
Dr. Campbell experiment on rats, showed the effect of turning on and off cancer on rats just by adjusting the animal protein intake from total calories in their diet based on casein.