The Abstract of Many research Papers Regarding A1 A2 Controversey
Northern European black-and-white breeds such as Friesian Holstein usually carry A1 and A2 alleles in equal proportion. Jersey cows and other Southern European breeds probably have about 1/3 A1 and 2/3 A2 genetics. Guernsey cows generally have about 10% A1 and 90% A2 genetics. So Most Milk in India Supplied by Organised Milk Industries Supply only Milk with A2 Casein as Major Part.
Which is Said to Be Linked to Diseases (Not Sufficient Proof).But There are many Researches that Says There is No Significant Relationship.
This review concludes, however, that there is no convincing or even probable evidence that the A1 beta-casein of cow milk has any adverse effect in humans.
The controversy is that one group of scientists claim BCM a cause of many health problems in human whereas other groups report beneficial effects of BCM and declare both types of milk safe for children and adults.
the whole theory based on generation of BCM from A1 milk as cause of harmful effects has no scientific standing, as yet.
There is also no evidence to suggest that consumption of A2 type milk would provide protection or sparing effects from these diseases.
Other Factors to Be Considered include : Life Style (Active to Lazy), Other Foods, Quantiity of Every Food, Most Impronantly Human genetics.
As per survey result although average
A1- β-casein consumption in France and Australia was similar (0.3 g / day) the mortality rates due to CHD were reported to be 88 and 33 per lakh population, respectively.
Sweden, Austria, Iceland, Canada, Germany have A1 β-casein consumption varying between 0.3 to 2.8 g per day the mortality rates due to CHD were 70-80 per lakh.Moreover, although A1 β-casein milk consumption patterns have not changed in USA, Australia, Switzerland over last decade but CHD mortality has dropped considerably.
The hypothesis therefore fails to satisfy dose response as well as exposure elimination / reduction criteria
Most Milk in Indian Market is Partly A1 And Partly A2 – So India Need not Worry.
The Fear About A1 Milk Has No Solid Research to Substantiate.
Two international Study Groups comprising of renowned scientists, one in New Zealand and the other by European Union (European Food Safety Authority), have gone through available publications and evidences on the subject and have concluded that fear about A1 milk was unfounded. There are also independent panel reports which have concluded that as yet there is no clinching evidence to ring public warning. The controversy in few developed countries appears to be driven by commercial motives as in New Zealand a company called A2 Corporation has been formed which owns A2 related patents and brand name and has been demanding mandatory testing of animals for purpose of labelling. Obviously, a small group of ‘Activists type of researchers are driving this controversy but unless concrete evidence emerges India should not fall prey to this propaganda’.
A. In order to reiterate good qualities in indigenous cows there is no need to denounce exotic breeds or crossbreds.
B. The hypothesis of A1 milk association with few chronic diseases drawn from a survey done in western countries population should not be extrapolated to India.
C. Considering the contribution of buffalo, indigenous cows and crossbred population in Indias milk pool and based on the assumption that β-casein is 45% of total protein and that around 25% of the β-casein may be from A1 allele cows, the average consumption of A1 Casein in milk in India would be around 0.24 g / day; 5 – 10 times lower than countries surveyed. So there is no cause to panic.
D. The Indian scientists should not consider the issue as buried but remain vigilant and monitor the situation periodically.
E. The vested interest groups should not whip up passions and mis-information campaign but should leave such matters to the wisdom of our scientists and the scientists should become more vocal in stating facts.
All the Above Content are from the Articles and Research Papers Listed and Linked Below. This Page is Published as A Quick Understanding of the A1 and A2 Criticism Arround the World and to Make RAAJ Milk Customers and our people to be Aware of the Real Scenario.
Thanks to Vethelplineindia.co.in for Presenting Article in a Detailed Manner. Read Full Article and Questions and Answer Section at vethelplineindia.co.in
The health effects of milk may depend on the breed of cow it came from.
Currently, A2 milk is being marketed as a healthier choice than regular milk.
It is claimed to have several health benefits, and to be easier to digest for people who are lactose intolerant.
However, not all scientists agree that A2 milk is better for health.
This article takes an objective look at the science behind A1 and A2 milk.
Casein is the largest group of proteins in milk, making up about 80% of the total protein content.
There are several types of casein in milk, and beta-casein is the second most common. Beta-casein exists in at least 13 different forms (1).
The two most common forms of beta-casein are:
A1 beta-casein: Milk from breeds of cows that originated in northern Europe is generally high in A1 beta-casein. A1 milk comes from breeds like the Holstein, Friesian, Ayrshire and British Shorthorn.
A2 beta-casein: Milk that is high in A2 beta-casein is mainly found in breeds that originated in the Channel Islands and Southern France. This includes breeds like the Guernsey, Jersey, Charolais and Limousin (1, 2).
Regular milk contains both A1 and A2 beta-casein, but A2 milk contains only A2 beta-casein.
Some studies indicate that A1 beta-casein may be harmful, and that A2 beta-casein is a safer choice. This is the reason for the “A1 vs A2” debate.
A2 milk is produced and marketed by the A2 Milk Company A2 Milk Company, and contains no A1 beta-casein.
Beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7) is the reason why regular milk is believed to be less healthy than A2 milk.
BCM-7 is an opioid peptide that is released during the digestion of A1 beta-casein (3, 4).
A few research groups have suggested that BCM-7 may be harmful (5, 6, 7, 8).
While BCM-7 may affect the digestive system, it is not yet clear to what extent BCM-7 is absorbed intact into the blood.
Studies have not found BCM-7 in the blood of healthy adults after drinking cow’s milk, but a few studies indicate that BCM-7 may be present in infants (7, 8, 9).
BCM-7 has been extensively studied, but its health relevance still remains unclear.
Below is a review of the scientific evidence linking A1 milk and BCM-7 with type 1 diabetes, heart disease, infant death, autism and digestive problems.
Bottom Line: Regular milk contains A1 beta-casein, which is partly broken down to beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM-7) in the stomach. BCM-7 has been linked with several adverse health effects in Rabits. Effects on Humans is Not Clear.
Several observational studies have found a link between A1 milk consumption during childhood and increased risk of type 1 diabetes. However, the evidence is mixed and more research is needed.
Two observational studies have linked the consumption of A1 milk with an increased risk of heart disease (6, 11).
This is supported by one experiment in rabbits. It showed that consuming A1 beta-casein promoted fat buildup in injured blood vessels. This buildup was much lower when the rabbits consumed A2 beta-casein (15).
Fat accumulation may potentially clog blood vessels and cause heart disease. However, the human relevance of the results has been debated (2).
So far, two human trials have investigated the effects of A1 milk on heart disease risk factors (16, 17).
One of them included 15 men and women who were at a high risk of heart disease. The study had a crossover design, meaning that all participants received A1 and A2 beta-casein at different periods during the study.
The study didn’t find any significant adverse effects on risk factors for heart disease. Compared with A2 beta-casein, the A1 type had similar effects on blood vessel function, blood pressure, blood fats and inflammatory markers (16).
Another study found no significant differences in the effects of A1 and A2 casein on blood cholesterol (17).
Bottom Line: There is no strong evidence that A1 milk increases the risk of heart disease. However, the long-term effects have not been studied.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reviewed the scientific literature and published a review in 2009. As part of their evaluation, the EFSA looked at the laboratory studies that have been done on BCM-7. They found that experiments in cells and animals have shown that BCM-7 can act as a weak opioid receptor agonist, but that in most of the animal studies, BCM-7 was not administered orally, as humans would be exposed to it, but rather was given to animals by injection into the peritoneal cavity or even directly into the spinal cord or brain, which makes these studies not useful for understanding how BCM-7 might affect humans.
 The EFSA found no relationship between chronic diseases and drinking milk with the A1 protein.
The EFSA study emphasized the dangers of drawing conclusions from correlations identified in epidemiological studies and the dangers of not reviewing all the evidence at hand.
Another 2009 review found no demonstration that consuming milk with A1 casein causes diabetes.
A 2014 review of research into the relationship between consumption of dairy products (including A1 and A2 proteins) and the incidence of diabetes found that while there appears to be a positive correlation between consumption of dairy products by babies and the incidence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in some people, and an inverse relationship between the consumption of dairy products and the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in some people, these correlations are tentative, it is impossible to determine what component or components of milk might be responsible for these effects, and it is unlikely that the expensive and complex research to determine the answers to these questions will ever be conducted.
Are Indian scientists silent on A1 / A2 research and situation is chaotic? This is mis-information propagated in social media to malign Indian scientists. National Bureau of Animal Genetic Resources (NBAGR), a renowned research institute in Karnal, has been active in surveying the A1/A2 situation in India since 2009. Their first report confirmed that A2 gene frequency in Indian breeds of cattle is around 98 % (almost 100 % in major milk breeds), whereas all the buffalo breeds studied were found to be of A2A2 type. Their further work in screening samples of HF, Jersey and crossbred bulls used in A. I. program also showed that these were predominantly carrying A2 allele. Recent studies published in 2012 also clarified that even in crossbred cow population predominant gene is A2. NBAGR has therefore rightly concluded that the situation in India demanded vigilance on breeding program but no immediate need to change breeding strategy. In April 2015 Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi has approved a study involving University of Punjab, NDRI and NBAGR to investigate and gather evidence about health safety of milk from Indian crossbred cows.
Is consumption of A1 milk cause of heart disease, diabetes and such other diseases in human? NO
Is consumption of A1 milk cause of heart disease, diabetes and such other diseases in human? NO The scare about so called harmful effects of A1 milk in media is being spread by ill-informed group of activists. Firstly, one should understand that there is a huge difference between ‘causal factor’ and ‘risk factor’ as the later only increases risk of a disease but cannot cause the disease on its own. The published survey reports although point out risk association but overzealous campaigners have started labelling these as disease causal factors. The controversy started with papers published starting from late 1990s by Dr. Elliott’s group in Australia. One such paper has reported results of a survey wherein food consumption trends in 20 developed countries were compared with official mortality rates due to chronic heart diseases (CHD), juvenile insulin-dependent type I diabetes mellitus (DM-I) and other diseases. The survey reported strong association between high A1 β-casein consumption and CHD / DM-I. The association was found to be stronger in high altitude countries, such as North America and North Europe. India was not included as part of the study and moreover, it is not high altitude and has radically distinct socio-economic attributes. So these results cannot be extrapolated to India and the controversy for us stops there only.
Survey based epidemiology studies that compare situations in different countries in respect of food consumption and disease prevalence or mortality have several inherent limitations. These papers attracted lot of criticism as inferences drawn were overarching and erroneous. The assumption in the report was that every individual in the country was exposed to equal level of risk factor (for example A1-casein-milk), which we know cannot be true due to socio-economic differences within the country. Lastly results of such surveys provide flexible opportunity to the industry, media and scientists to pick up and magnify observations as per their perceptions. For example in these and other reports even rice, wheat and soy have been alleged to be comparatively stronger diabetogenic than milk but did not attract so much of media and public attention. Lastly, in such chaotic situation sane and independent voices of even eminent scientists group do not get attention. Dr. Truswell a renowned scientist from Australia in 2005 and European Food Safety Authority in 2009 after critically going through available literature published excellent papers rebutting claims about A1 casein milk but in media these are scarcely mentioned.
For establishing causal or risk association between factor and disease there are set criteria (also called Mills Canons); out of these two are considered critically important: (a) dose-response effect and (b) biological explanation with direct evidence. As per survey result although average A1- β-casein consumption in France and Australia was similar (0.3 g / day) the mortality rates due to CHD were reported to be 88 and 33 per lakh population, respectively. Sweden, Austria, Iceland, Canada, Germany have A1 β-casein consumption varying between 0.3 to 2.8 g per day the mortality rates due to CHD were 70-80 per lakh. Moreover, although A1 β-casein milk consumption patterns have not changed in USA, Australia, Switzerland over last decade but CHD mortality has dropped considerably. The hypothesis therefore fails to satisfy dose response as well as exposure elimination / reduction criteria.