This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Ridiculous Result of '95% of Chinese People have Lactose Intolerance'!!. Totally nonsense at all!!! I have never heard of seen such a big lie and iresponsible manner before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.8.243 ( talk) 17:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance#Lactose_intolerance_by_group —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikievil666 ( talk • contribs) 18:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I would also like to see the sources used for the map. It's surprising to see countries like Argentina and Uruguay (whose population is almost entirely composed of european immigrants) having the very same values of the surrounding countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.76.177.72 ( talk) 12:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
In the part that shows " * 1.1 Lactose intolerance by group" - North American Jews stick out (as do the British) for their relatively highly Lactose intolerance. Do environmental factors (like stress, past life circumstances, etc...) play a part in lactose intolerance (the answer is obviously yes, but I'm trying to gauge an idea of how much a part is played). For example, do Indians in India have a lower or higher lactose intolerance than South Asians in America or the UK (don't be surprise with any counter-intuititive observations here - lactose exposure might have some effect on gene expression).
Are there other health problems that may be caused by lactose intolerance, or that are associated with it? Can some of these problems be due to associated genetic causes?
This is probably mentioned on the site, though I'm not sure about it. When I try to have 'raw' milk, it causes problems for me. However, heating the milk makes it digestible. Does heat destroy lactose?
Well, no because studies have shown that it does not in many ways. Heating the milk will actually increase the levels of lactose in the dairy products.
IANAD, raw milk may contain bacteria which, unless killed by heating, may upset your stomach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.122.219.237 ( talk) 18:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Would one of the side effects of milk for cats be bloating? Seems ever since she decided she really had to have milk, she has had bloating
Bloating would not be visible to the eye, unless the cat was furless and real skinny. However cats will whine when they experience discomfort.
It should be noted that if a mammal is taken off milk (voluntarily weaned), the lactase producing cells in the small intestine may stop secreting lactase and therefore "become" lactose intolerant. This is common among stray cats. With pet cats, people often will feed cats milk on an occasional basis, this keeps the cats producing lactase. However, stray cats have usually been properly weaned and if given milk can suffer collics. This is already discussed in Wikipedia cat page.
This lactose intolerance brought on by voluntary weaning also occurs in humans.
Is there a citation for the "majority of humans" claim? A lot of humans seem not to be: most western Europeans and north Americans are not lactose intolerant, Mongolians regularly drink fermented horse milk, and so on. -- Delirium 08:25, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)
there is a recent citation for the "majority of humans", the abstract of which I provide here:
Dbach 15:25, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Annu Rev Genet. 2003;37:197-219
Genetics of lactase persistence and lactose intolerance. Swallow DM.
Galton Laboratory, Department of Biology, University College London, Wolfson House, 4 Stephenson Way, London NW1 2HE, England. dswallow@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk
The enzyme lactase that is located in the villus enterocytes of the small intestine is responsible for digestion of lactose in milk. Lactase activity is high and vital during infancy, but in most mammals, including most humans, lactase activity declines after the weaning phase. In other healthy humans, lactase activity persists at a high level throughout adult life, enabling them to digest lactose as adults. This dominantly inherited genetic trait is known as lactase persistence. The distribution of these different lactase phenotypes in human populations is highly variable and is controlled by a polymorphic element cis-acting to the lactase gene. A putative causal nucleotide change has been identified and occurs on the background of a very extended haplotype that is frequent in Northern Europeans, where lactase persistence is frequent. This single nucleotide polymorphism is located 14 kb upstream from the start of transcription of lactase in an intron of the adjacent gene MCM6. This change does not, however, explain all the variation in lactase expression.
I've also added a couple of cites to the article. It's true that most northern Europeans, and thus most Americans, who are largely descended from northern Europeans, have adult lactose tolerance. This is due to a mutation in northern Europe that seems to have happened after domestication of cattle, and use of dairy in the diet in that area around 7000 years ago. However, Europeans are a minority of the world population; east Asians and central Africans, for example, are largely lactose intolerant in adulthood, and are more numerous in the world population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warren Dew ( talk • contribs) 17:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
didn't find this very helpful, would rather see a more scientific link.
External link:
http://gerd.msn.com/article.aspx?aid=49
I agree - only concerning the support of the "majority"-claim I fear that nowadays lots of internet resources rely on wikipedia. That's why I never trust Internet information on scientific subjects. I'd rather search PubMed (and will do so)
Dbach 19:14, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I have found a better citation and replace it. Dbach 15:26, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If a human is lactose intolerant, are they intolerant to all milk, regardless of whether it came from a human or other mammal? Do humans became lactase non-persistent after weaning from human milk, or does this only apply to other mammalian milk? Most of the (scientific) literature I pull up only talks about general dairy, not human dairy. -- Westendgirl 19:36, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Many doctors I have discussed lactose intolerance with have said the opposite. There are occasional cases of humans who become lactose intolerant following weaning, such as following a vegan diet or non dairy vegetarian diet. Lactose intolerance due to weaning is also common among stray cats. You will find that most pet cats who are fed milk throughout their lives are fine versus many stray cats are lactose intolerant and will experience discomfort if given milk. Of course there may be a combination of factors at work here but it nonetheless exists-- Tallard 18:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Before I change it, does anyone know what's up with the last paragraph: "uncomfortable phases of life... (like urination)." and "the minority Western European group should be labeled as suffering from lactase persistence." This all seems a little silly. Anyone care to defend it? chihowa 14:33, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I've been researching this subject for a while (not scientifically, just because I'm curious) and I've found no mention of lactose intolerance being caused by a mutation on chromosome 2. What I've read is that there is a change in the translation of the lactase gene after the weaning period in most of the Earth's people. Here's one link: [ http://www.emedicine.com/PED/topic1270.htm ] -- Bobsky 19:51, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article refers to "western eurasians" but does not link to any of the articles on Eurasians. Which kind is being referred to? Does "western eurasian" include northern americans? If it clearly relates to an existing article we should create a link so there is no confusion. - Tεx τ urε 23:09, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"Western Eurasian" clearly refers to the people of Western Eurasia (to avoide having to list a half a dozen regions) and people descendant from that origin. It is after all first and foremost a geographical term. A link to the article on
Eurasia would be more appropiate, but not really necessary.
I'm "Black" and I can drink fresh milk. But I also have pale skin and red hair, so whatever.
Here I am in Japan and people are drinking milk and eating cheese like crazy. If they're lactose intolerant they don't show any symptoms. Come to think of it, doesn't the word "intolerant" imply something stronger than "unable to digest"? After all, I'm unable to digest grass, but I don't go around calling myself "grass intolerant".
The first time I heard this "only white folk can digest milk" idea, it was on a vegan propaganda site. I considered it highly suspect at the time. This article provides more credible scientific-sounding information, but given the lack of solid sources, isn't it possible Wikipedia is being duped by anti-dairy propaganda?
-- 221.249.13.34 06:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
hadn't evolved the genetic basis of lactose tolerance were completely unable to benefit from milk, it's hard to see how selection on those genes could have begun. 68.35.68.100 14:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I was surprised to see the claim in this article that 98% of South-East Asians are lactose-intolerant. Everyone in my Vietnamese family drinks cow's milk regularly, and I definitely saw dairy products for sale when I visited Vietnam myself. I'd like to see where this data is coming from. I'm wondering if this is the med school equivalent of an urban myth. Scientivore ( talk) 18:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Around 95% of Chinese and SE Asians are lactose intolerant?! Odd, very odd. Does that apply to Powdered milk (fresh milk being rare and expensive)?
Somewhat intolerant sounds like an oxymoron. We need a new term to replace 'lactose intolerant' as most people tolerate it well enough. I have lived in China for six years and have asked many Chinese about this. None of them know anyone who is lactose intolerant. I see Chinese drinking cow's milk daily. Scientists get their statistics from breath or blood measurements, not from talking to people. Wikievil666 ( talk) 18:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm wondering if "lactase persistency" can be categorized either as a dominant or recessive trait? E.g. what phenotype will an offspring, parented by a lactose intolerant and lactase persistent person, be? -anonymous 04:03, 5 August, 2005 (UTC)
This section is misnamed? Etiology means is the study of causation of a problem, as such one should discuss genetic mutations in populations, and effect of (usually) temporary lactose intolerance after a bout of gastroenteritis (especially in children and after giardiasis infections). The current section is more about the consequences of being lactase deficient, ie why this causes the symptoms that it does. A better title for current section might be 'Symptomatology' or 'Pathophysiology of symptoms'. David Ruben talk 19:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Just how relevant are the statistics in the data table if the sample sizes of some groups are in the 20s? I understand it probably reflects the population very roughly, but if anyone can find a similar study with larger sample sizes I think that would make a stronger point.
Its seems to me that there is unfaith in the "condition" of lactose intolerance.
As for a fact it does exist. 1 out of 6 finnish simply get bloating, stomach ache and diarrhea for digesting milk products. As milk still strongly exists in our traditional diet, the scientists have developed a range of milk products, where the lactose has chemically been removed and are widely available at the stores. No need to remember to take additives before the meal or look for other ways of getting calcium to our diets. As this is patented invention, I recommend people in need for these to contact VALIO ltd. on importing these to you.
There's a section in the text that reads "In 2001, a Finnish research group developed "HYLA" products, which are milk products low in lactose, ranging from .." I was born in Finland in 1982, and I don't remember a time without HYLA products, but then again those were (and are) UHT stuff, not made with the cromatography method, I think .. but in any case: in it's current form the section gives the false impression that HYLA is a marking mainly associated with something developed in 2001 (I think Valio released "Evolus" products in 2001?) ..
The article implies the existence of a 'dairy allergy'. Does anyone have any information on the prevalence of this? If it exists as stated in the article, affecting people who ingest both milk and hard cheese, then what I (and my doctor) have been calling lactose intolerance is actually a dairy allergy (as I react on both). -- Kickstart70 21:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
to User Kickstart70 and others this information on dairy allergies should be included in the article titled "Milk Allergy". Some reference between these pages should be made so that the distinction between Lactose Intolerance and Milk Allergy would be clear. alexselkirk1704 16Jun06
I added the statements about the Fulani people in the History of Genetic Prevalence. They were once a nomadic dairy consuming people and I thought it would enrich the article by adding a small blurb about them.
Leward03 18:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Are there any studies on lactose intolerance in India, and (now this would be where it might get fascinating) on regional and social distribution? Given that the Aryans introduced the cow to India, and only used it for dairy rather than meat-production purposes (and raised not eating cow meat to a religion - and a caste mark) their descendants would probably have very high rates of tolerance, while the descendants of the earlier inhabitants probably would not. Lewis
I agree that India needs to be added to the article. People in India (Hindus at least; I don't know about the Muslim population) drink milk and eat milk products as a staple part of their diet and an important source of protein. This should be noted in the History of Genetic Prevalence section. I am making a brief addition to the sentence "Whatever the precise origin in time and place, most modern Northern Europeans and people of European ancestry show the effects of this mutation (that is, they are able to safely consume milk products all their lives)...", but the article would also benefit from a paragraph about India. That is, did the mutation travel from Europe to India, or vice versa, or is it perhaps an independent mutation? Many Indian languages are related to European languages -- that is, the Indo-European language family includes most European languages and about half of all Indian languages. The mutation for lactase persistence may have travelled along with the ancestral languages, whichever way the migration went (probably from India to Europe). VictoriaWordNerd ( talk) 00:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually I think the migration(s) went both ways, both east and west, the posited ancient Indo-European homeland is thought to have existed somewhere in what is now southern Russia. There is of course still considerable debate on the issue, what is certain is that European and Indian populations share a common heritage, but neither was derived from the other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.90.241 ( talk) 00:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I just want to add my personal thoughts on this article's statement that "Lactose-intolerant adults can drink about 250 ml (8 oz) of milk per day without severe symptoms (McGee 2004) (Swagerty et al. 2002)." I am a lactose-intolerant adult, and if I tried to drink even one glass of milk, I would pay for it. And believe me, I love the taste of dairy products. If I could "cheat" with impunity I would be eating ice cream and pizza on a regular basis. Perhaps I have a more severe form of lactose intolerance than the average afflicted adult, but I think that most people who can consume dairy products in moderation don't self-identify as lactose intolerant.
70.181.11.107 02:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the sources, what they really indicate is that a single adult lifetime dose of 200 ml of milk won't cause major symptoms in most lactase impersistent adults. Well, duh! If you're lactose intolerant and never drink milk, there's a good chance all the intestinal bacteria which digest lactose will die off and not be present. Then if you drink one glass of milk, the lactose has a good chance of passing entirely through the digestive system without incident. I know from personal experience, though, that if a lactose intolerant adult tries this on a regular basis, the lactose digesting bacteria will soon be back and you'll be back to having symptoms from as little as a tablespoon of milk. Unfortunately, the dairy industry has a lot more money to fund studies than we do. Warren Dew ( talk) 19:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
We say:
But the map we display right below, whose data is attributed to a 1972 Scientific American article, shows that it's only the southern third or so of Africa (the southern half of sub-saharan Africa) where "most" people are lactose-intolerant, while the middle third (the northern half of sub-saharan Africa, e.g. Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon) seems to have populations who are mostly lactose-tolerant. We also say that some scientists think there was an independent more recent mutation in East Africa. Are there additional (maybe more recent) sources with better data we can cite to clear this up? -- Delirium 06:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Thirdy Jim James Beijing
I wish to inform everybody that the American Academy of Pediatrics have just published its latest clinical report "Lactose Intolerance in Infants, Children, and Adolescents" in the September 2006 issue of its peer-reviewed and scientific journal, Pediatrics.
You may read thru the full text of the report at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/3/1279 or download the free PDF document version.
I hope all of you can find some level of satisfaction. Please read the article carefully. THIRDY
I would remove this map, because it's ridiculously uninformative. Of all continents, only in Africa there is more than three countries not classified as "no data", and the footer says: "African countries are only a rough guess". So, there are only six countries in the whole world, for which the map has any sense! -- Grzes 14:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The map is a work in progress, and as we collect more data, it can become more accurate. If you dislike the paucity of data in our map, I would humbly suggest that you help us find more well-sourced data! There is a lot on the internet, and I have tracked down about 2/3 of the current data listed in our table. I am sure I have not exhausted what exists on this topic, however, and a lot more could be done. I just temporarily ran out of energy for this enterprise. Another difficult arises when there are different populations in an area with widely different rates of lactose intolerance. For example, many indigenous populations have very different rates of lactose intolerance than immigrants, especially from Europe. So the Ainu and the Japanese exhibit different rates of lactose intolerance. Native Americans and European Americans have different rates of lactose intolerance, and so on. Perhaps we can consider a different type of display, such as two maps; one for indigenous populations and one for immigrant populations. I am not sure. Suggestions are welcome.-- Filll 19:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
This map seems to me especially problematic for Africa. According to the article lactose tolerance developed independently in Europe and East Africa and yet all three East African countries (Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda) are shaded in the "91%-100% intolerant" colour. Also, a slew of countries in West and Central Africa are apparently mostly lactose tolerant despite the article stating that Sub-Saharan Africans are generally lactose intolerant. The only reasoning I could find in the article for this was that these countries all seem to be in the geographical distribution of the Fulani people, who, according to the article, are mostly lactose tolerant. But the Fulani are an ethnic minority in these countries, so their rate of lactose tolerance would not be indicative of the rate of lactose tolerance in the general population. One other issue is that in South Africa nearly 20% of the population has at least some European ancestry (whites and coloureds), the majority of which is northern European. And lactose tolerance being a "dominant" gene wouldn't that indicate that a person with full or partial northern European ancestry would most likely be lactose tolerant? This would put the figures of lactose intolerance lower than "91%-100%". In general I feel like if most of the African countries are just "rough guesses" than the information shouldn't really be there. Madritor ( talk) 23:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance#Lactase-enzyme_medication does not cite anything. All I can find when googling for lactase medication are fishy supplement vendors. Pubmed has ( PMID 12712706 & PMID 11906576) very little about the subject. Can someone find double-blind trials, stuff like that?
-- Stereo 03:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
We need an updated version of our map, now that we have more data. One of the references also shows a map to compare with, from the lecture of a Professor at University of Alabama. -- Filll 02:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
SHIBUYA, S., F. YAMASHITA, T. FUNATSU, Fr AL. Lactose intolerance in Japanese children. Advan. Med. (Japan.) 72: 323, 1970.
The relative frequency of acquired primary hypolactasia has been determined in adult Maoris, Samoans and Europeans by measuring an alteration in breath hydrogen concentration two hours after a 50 g oral lactose load. By this indirect measurement hypolactasia was present in 64% of Maoris, 54% of Samoans and 9% of Europeans. The differences between Maoris and Europeans (p less than 0.001) and between Samoans and Europeans (p less than 0.001) were significant.
Lactose malabsorption was studied by a breath hydrogen technique in 139 Samoan and 68 white schoolchildren. The Samoans were studied in four locations, two in Western Samoa and two in New Zealand, and the white children in both the Cook Islands and New Zealand. The prevalence of malabsorption varied with location: for Samoans it ranged from 41% to 60% in Western Samoa and 0% to 35% in New Zealand; white children had rates of 27% in the Cook Islands and 5% in New Zealand. Environmental factors rather than genetic factors are likely to play the main part in initiating if not perpetuating lactose malabsorption. In both races lactose malabsorption had no effect on the acceptance of, consumption of, and number of gastrointestinal symptoms caused by milk and milk biscuits. Children who had symptoms after consuming a particular dairy product were more likely to say they disliked it than those who reported no symptoms.
The breath hydrogen test (BHT) was adapted for use in young infants and children. The diagnostic criterion of sugar malabsorption in the BHT was determined by oral administration of 0.5 g/kg of unabsorbable sugar (lactulose) to 21 healthy infants and children. A maximum increase in breath hydrogen less than 0.05 ml/min per m2 was observed in all subjects. A good correlation between results by the BHT and by the ordinary lactose tolerance test was obtained after oral administration of 2 g/kg lactose to 21 healthy infants and children, 2 congenital lactase-deficient infants, and 7 adults. Using this test, 80 healthy Japanese infants and children (aged between one month and 15 years) and 18 adults were examined for lactose malabsorption after a dose of 1 g/kg lactose. All infants and children under 2-years old absorbed lactose completely. The incidence of lactose malabsorption was 30% in 3-year, 36% in 4-year, 58% in 5-year, and 86% in 6-year-old children, 85% in schoolchildren, and 89% in adults. Thus the incidence of lactase deficiency gradually increases with age from 3 years, and about 90% of all normal Japanese adults are lactase-deficient.
1. Alzante, H. Gonzalez, H. and Guzman, J. “Lactose intolerance in South American Indians.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 22: 122, (1969).
2. Amiot, D., Hioco, D. and Durlach, J. “Frequence du deficit magnesique chez le sujet et dans diverses osteopathies.” J. Med. Besancon 5:371-378, (1969).
3. Aurbach, GD., Marx, S.J. and Spiegel, AM. ”Parathyroid Hormone, Calcitonin, and Calciferols.” In textbook of Endocrinology, Williams, RH. (Ed), Saunders Co., 922-1032, (1981).
4. Aviolo, LV. “Postmenopausal osteoporosis: prevention versus cure.” Fed. Proc. 40: 2418, (1981).
5. Briscoe, A.M. and Ragen, C. “Relation of magnesium on calcium metabolism in man.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 19: 296-306, (1966).
6. Bryan, W.T.K. and Bryan, M.P. ”Cytotoxic Reactions in the Diagnosis of Food Allergy.” Otol. N. Am. 4: 523-533, (1971).
7. Bygrave, F.L. “Cellular Calcium and Magnesium Metabolism.” In An Introduction to Bio-inorganic Chemistry. Williams, D. R. (Ed) Thomas, 171-184, (1976).
8. Cook. G.C. and Kajubi, SK. “Tribal incidence of lactase deficiency in Uganda.” Lancet l: 725, (1966).
9. Davidson, S., Passmore. R., Brock, J.F. and Truswell, AS. “Human Nutrition and Dietetics.” Churchill Livingstone, 166-175, (1979).
10. Davidson, S., Passmore, R., Brock, J.F. and Truswell, A.S. “Human Nutrition and Dietetics.” Churchill Livingstone, 90-106. (1979).
11. Draper, H.H. and Scythes, C.A. ”Calcium, phosphorous, and osteoporosis.” Fe. Proc. 40: 2434, (1984).
12. DuRuisseau, J.P. and Marineau, J.M. “Osteoporose medication calcique et magnesienne,” See Int’l Sympos on Magnesium, 223-226, (1971/1973).
13. Gilat, T., et. al. “Lactase deficiency in Jewish communities in Israel.” Am J. Digest. Dis. 16:203, (1971).
14. Gilat. T., et. al “Lactose intolerance in an Arab population.” Am. J. Digest. Dis. 16:203, (1977)
15. Gudmand-hoyer, and F., Jarnum, S. “Lactose malabsorption in Greenland Eskimos.” Acta Med. Scand. 186:235, (1969).
16. Holick, M.F. and Clark, MB. “The photobiogenesis and metabolism of Vitamin D.” Fed. Proc. 37: 2567-2574, (1978).
17. Huang, S.S. and Bayless, T.M. “Milk and lactose intolerance in healthy orientals.” Science 160: 83, (1968).
18. Johnson, J.D., et. al. “Lactose malabsorption among the Pima Indians of Arizona.” Gastroenterology 73: 985, (1977).
19. Kretchmer, N., et.al. “Intestinal absorption of lactose in Nigerian ethnic groups.” Lancet 2: 392, (l971).
20. Larkins, R.G., McAuley, S.J., Colston, K.W., Evans, I.M.A., Galante, L.S. and Macintyre, I. “Regulation of Vitamin D. Metabolism without Parathyroid Hormone.” Lancet: 289-291, (1973).
21. Linkswiler, H.M., Zemel, M.B., Hegsted, M., and Schuette, S. “Protein-induced hypercalciuria.” Fed. Proc. 40:2429, (1981).
22. MacIntyre, I. “Vitamin D and the integration of Calcium Regulating Hormones.” In First European Symposium on hormones and Cell Regulation. Dumont, J. and Nunez. J. (Ed) North Holland, 195-208, (1977).
23. Nasrallah, SM. “Lactose intolerance in the Lebanese population and in ‘Mediterranean lymphoma’.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 32:1994-1996, (1979).
24. Newcomer, AD., et. al. “Family studies of lactose deficiency in the American Indian.” Gastroenterology 73; 1299, (1977).
25. Parlier. R., Hioco, D. and LeBlanc, R. “Les troubles du metacolisme magnesien. Symptomes et traitment des carences et des plethores magnesiennes.” Rev. Franc. Endocr. Clin. 4: 335-339, (1963).
26. Rude, R.K., Bethune, J.E. and Singer, F.R. “Renal tubular maximum for magnesium in normal, hyperparathyroid and hypoparathyroid man.” J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 51: 1425-1431, (1980).
27. Schrier, R.W. and Leaf, A. “Effect of Hormones on Water, Sodium, Chloride, and Potassium Metabolism.” In Textbook of Endocrinology, Williams RH. (Ed) Saunders Co., 1032-
28. Seelig, MS. “Magnesium Deficiency in the Pathogenesis of Disease.” Plenum Medical Book Company, 3 17-321, (1980).
29. Seeman, E. and Riggs, B.L. “Dietary prevention of bone loss in the elderly.” Geriatrics 36:71-79, (1981).
30. Senewiratne, B., et. al. “Intestinal lactase deficiency in Ceylon (Sri Lanka).” Gastroenterology 72:1257, (1977).
31. Shibuya, S. et. al. “Lactose intolerance in Japanese children.” Advan. Med (Japan). 72:323, (1970). -- Filll 02:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm a bit puzzled by:
"In America over recent years (1990–2000) there has been a notable increase of available lactose-reduced and lactose-free dairy products; examples being cottage cheese, American cheese and ice cream."
I just haven't found this to be true. I'll agree that there has been a notable increase of lactose-free dairy products. I can get lactose-free milk and at this time of year eggnog everywhere, and I'm not limited in choice either. I can get fatfree, 1%, 2& or regular milk, and there are multiple companies. I also know that there is lactose free cheese and ice-cream carried at some specialty places though soy is much more common. There are a few products which utilize lactose free products--there is a frozen mac and cheese which is lactose free. But I've never seen lactose free cottage cheese, or anything else really. And the only thing that I can get with ease is milk and eggnog. Cheese and ice cream are harder to find.
I can get almost everything soy--soy ice cream, sour cream, cream cheese, milk, eggnog, yoghurts and cheeses of every variety, everything. And while having a soy alternative for every product in existence is nice, it's not the same as having lactose free milk products. I'm really confused by this article saying that there has been a resurgence starting 16, or well now 17 years ago, that includes products I simply can't find 17 years later TStein 10:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I remember reading about how the Masai, even though they exhibit certain features of lactose intolerance by western tests, still can consume milk without ill effects. So there is some confusion about what lactose intolerance really means and what the tests are measuring. There is some other processes involved here. Anyone know anything about this?-- Filll 23:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I do not understand why most of the table listing frequency of lactose intolerance in the column "Allele frequency" says "N/A"? Since the gene is recessive the allele frequency should be equal to the square root of the frequency of the population that is lactose intolerant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.180.136.145 ( talk) 15:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
THANKS FOR THE LACTOSE CURE. I ALWAYS GO TO WIKIPEDIA FOR CURE CUZ ER1 IN THE WORLD DONT KNOW. I HAD HICCUPS BEFORE N WIKIPEDIA CURED ME SO KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. ALSO I GOT LACTOSE INTOLERANT CUZ I WAS DRINKING MILK ERDAY THEN STOPPED FOR A MONTH N SOMIN FUCKED UP —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.195.132.253 ( talk) 04:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC).
Although one source says that up to 75% of South Americans are intolerant, this shouldn't be taken as uniform for every South American country. I don't think that Bolivia, for example, with 75% of native population has the same percentage of Argentina, which is 97% white according to the CIA World Factbook. If the figure is taken as unique for all South America, then the national borders should be deleted from the map. Also, Tierra del Fuego is part of South America.-- cloviz 14:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Of course you are free to write it here. But this all takes work. And if you volunteer to do the work, then it would be appreciated.-- Filll 01:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
A book I was reading for a nutrition course mentions "Lactose maldigestion" but I do not see it here.
Gordon and Smith (2006) state the following about primary and secondary lactose maldigestion:
"Primary lactose maldigestion
occurs when production of the enzyme
lactase declines for no apparent reason.
Secondary lactose maldigestion occurs when
a specific cause, such as long-standing
diarrhea, results in a decline in lactase
production. When significant symptoms
develop after lactose intake, it is then called
lactose intolerance" (p. 138).
Wardlaw, Gordon M., & Smith, Anne M. (2006). Contemporary Nutrition : Issues and Insights (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
ISBN 0–07–250185–5
Hi, I'm new at this, I'm sorry. Have a nice day :) Tortellini
05:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems that we know that most humans have some level of lactose intolerance. And we know that among those humans, the level of lactose tolerance varies. *** It may be useful to give a definition of a threshold level, to separate out tolerance from intolerance, at least for medical purposes, if doctors have set one. And it might even be of a little use to give an idea of how much lactose an "average" intolerant person can tolerate. But the main thrust should be to give a clear concept of the great range of tolerance among the intolerant. - 69.87.204.193 21:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems like I can take milk with oatmeal in the morning with no problems. But milk or ice cream in the evening lead to "intestinal distress". Maybe just because the milk with the oatmeal is a small amount. But maybe milk with food is less of a problem than milk alone? - 69.87.204.193 21:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a dispute about whether this article (and possibly other articles) are may be used as a platform for original research for the sake of being "helpful to people needing to reduce their symptoms", as put by the contributor of the sections containing the original research. 18:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
The user Tallard has contributed two paragraphs to the article, whose current content is as follows:
I became lactose intolerant almost a year ago. I started taking these once-daily pills that have been working great ever since. It's call Digestive Advantage for Lactose Intolerance. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? Are there any similar products? Danny 18:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
the drugs used to avoid the symptoms of lactose intolerance contain an enzyme that digests the lactose for the patient (lactose intolerant patients are missing this enzyme (lactase))
I apologize for mucking up the edit history with repeated edits; I'm quite new at this. Nearly all the edits were corrections of a word or two from what I'd added previously; the more substantial portions are pretty much cleanups and additions of uncontroversial information. I hope anyone trying to follow them won't be too angry that I haven't made it as easy as I should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.212.74.209 ( talk) 07:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC).
Frequency of lactose intolerance in Eastern Slavs is evaluated as 40-50% (but not 15%) according to measuring the blood glucose level after lactose ingestion and according to DNA analysis of population samples of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians. Frequency of lactose intolerance in indigenous peoples of Sibera is more than 90%. Valenkevich and his colleagues ([9] in table 'Lactose intolerance by group') used some unusual criteria of lactose intolerance diagnosis resulting in understated of intolerance and two or three fold lower frequency of intolerance.
See Borinskaya et al., Molecular diagnosis and frequencies of primary hypolactasia in populations of RUSSIA and neighboring countries]// Mol Biol (Mosk). 2006 Nov-Dec;40(6):1031-6 (in Russian). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17209431&query_hl=8&itool=pubmed_docsum
The journal Molecular Biology is available online by http://springeronline.com/journal/11008 ISSN (online): 1608-3245
See also Kozlov A., Lisitsyn D. History of dairy cattle-breeding and distribution of LAC*R and LAC*P alleles among European populations // In: C.Renfrew & K.Boyle (Eds). Archaeogenetics: DNA and the population prehistory of Europe. — Cambridge: McDonald Institute for archaeological Research, 2000, 309-313.
213.141.131.93 08:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
"Other dairy products, except butter and milk-protein supplements, are similarly rich in calcium and potassium; none, however, are normally fortified with vitamins A or D. Dairy substitutes, such as soy or rice, are not naturally rich in calcium, potassium, or vitamins A or D (and, like all nonanimal products, contain no vitamin B12). Prominent brands of these products, however, are often voluntarily fortified with many of these nutrients (this is typically advertised prominently on the packaging, since it is not required by law)....."
Someone seems to have forgotten that America is not the only country in the world. The details above would vary from country to country. I believe Wikipedia is being written for an international audience, not just a USA one.--—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
The reference #2 (soynutrition.com link) does not support the preceding wikipedia statements about recessive genes. In fact, the article states nothing about genetics. Can anyone back up that information? Jwigton 04:50, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this list could do with being a little more extensive, such as the one found here: http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/digestive-health/nutrition/lactosecontent.pdf Perhaps not all of them (does anybody really need to know the lactose content of 1/2 a cup of orange sherbert?). Also, perhaps it would be a good idea to do a little maths and use the same weight of each foodstuff for comparison (say per 100g). Anyway, I'm much too tired to do anything about it right now, but I'll check back in a few days. Lewyblue 03:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Rcej, I am not arguing that Wikipedia should not give lay medical advice. Which is why I rewrote the paragraph to take any medical presumption out of it. Now it's strictly a food tolerance paragraph. But the fact is most doctors do not bother performing the above cited diagnostic tests on regular patients, they just say live with it or take supplements, because lactose intolerance is not considered a medical disease. So as long as this paragraph remains in the food realm there is not reproachable. Furthermore, this section used to be 4 paragraphs long. I perceive your Wikipedia philosophy may slant a little toward deletionist, but in this case I believe going from 4 paragraphs to 2 lines is perfectly suitable for the article-- Tallard 01:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
This is, of course, anecdotal...I have apparently been cured of lactose intolerance though not in a great way. Last year I underwent a partial thyroidectomy (to remove a lump that suddenly appeared). During the course of healing I developed a severe MRSA infection which required strong antibiotics to treat. Those antibiotics killed a large amount of my normal intestinal bacteria and allowed c. difficile to proliferate, which was preventing me from properly digesting food. After a round of strong antibiotics to treat that, I have slowly worked my way up to apparently digesting dairy products which would previously cause me considerable discomfort without issue. Today I had pizza for lunch and lasagna for dinner (yeah, unhealthy, but it proves my point).
Of course this is not a routine I would suggest to anyone. I only bring this up to see if anyone knows of similar events or studies of events that have caused a similar result in other people. If so, those studies (full cited) could perhaps be used here. -- Kickstart70- T- C 02:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Tallard, in the article, the syntax "..where mother's milk is the only commonly available source of milk.." is just a poorly written, horridly silly way to try to explain the direct meaning. There is no dairy consumption after weaning, because in many of those Asian and African cultures... there is no dairy industry, nor commercial dairy consumption occuring period. The exclusive availabilty of mother's milk is not the issue; but, the fact that beyond infancy, there will be no dairy consumption is the issue. And also, these are not the reasons children become weaned... weaning always occurs, regardless of culture. I know you did not mean it to read that way, but often, things need to be written in reasonable, even obvious terms.-- Rcej 01:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I just read the article for the first time and really appreciated it, especially since I had no clue how lactase "non-persistence" worked before now. I am a bit baffled by the 2nd sentence, though: "from a world view, lactose intolerance can be regarded as 'normal' for humans whereas lactose tolerance may be considered a form of neoteny." Is it an encyclopedia's job to say what's normal and what's abnormal? And are only people over 4 years old humans? Or are children under 4 years old also humans? Just seems a bit off. TrickyApron ( talk) 08:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The lead section needs work per WP:LEAD. In general, it should be a summary of the article. As is, it doesn't summarize the article well, while introducing a great deal of material about the three major types of lactose intolerance that is not expanded upon in the rest of the article as one would expect. I think the discussion on the three types should be moved to within the article proper, near the beginning of course, and the lead section then expanded and modified to be more of a summary. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
There are three major types of lactose intolerance [1]:
What happened to this material? It seems necessary and it seems to be well-cited. In the current article "Secondary lactose intolerance" is introduced towards the end of the article with no explanation. -- Kvng ( talk) 16:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
According to section 6.2 of this article, entitled Lactose Supplementation, "Lactase enzymes similar to the those produced in the small intestines of humans are produced industrially by fungi of the genus aspergillus. The enzyme, β-galactosidase, is available in tablet form in a variety of doses, in many countries without a prescription. It functions well only in high-acid environments, such as that found in the human gut due to the addition of gastric juices from the stomach."
But accoriding to a different article called "Beta-galactosidase" (I'd add the link, but I don't know how), "Lactase is often confused as an alternate name for β-galactosidase, but it is actually simply a sub-class of β-galactosidase." So isn't this article just saying that the enzyme Lactase is available in pill form? And if that's the case, how does the enzyme, which has an optimum Ph level of 6.5, survive the low 1-2 Ph of stomach acid without being denatured? I actually came to this article looking for the answer to that question: How do chewable Lactase tablets make it to the intestines without being denatured? But even if no one has the answer to that specific question, this section is still somewhat unclear. 80.84.191.33 ( talk) 21:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
This page is complete bull. Eastern europeans drink milk like it's water and eat cheese with every meal. So do mongolians. Mongolian herders practically survive on mare's milk for several months out of the year. How can they be 50% intolerant? Same with sicilians that are supposed to be intollerant but all the sicillians I've met drink milk. Here's a newsflash: if you drink milk in Sicily you won't feel well because it's very hot and humid there. That not only causes extra bacteria in the milk but also discomfort because of the fat content. I know because I've don eit. Can anyone explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.68.72 ( talk) 06:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
In the lead section it is said that "[i]t is estimated that 20% of adult humans are lactose intolerant". However, in the Diagnosis section it reads "[s]ince lactose intolerance is the normal state for most adults on a worldwide scale [...]". So, what percentage of adults humans are lactose intolerant? If only 20 percent, it is not "the normal state for most adults". -- Victor Chmara ( talk) 12:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The section on lactose intolerance in India, north vs south, references a very old study. The basic premise of that study has been disproved by genetic surveys of the last decade - the Indian ethnicity is now considered autochthonous. See the references in the section "Racial groups of India". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.148.237 ( talk) 19:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I believe the article needs to have a dedicated 'Symptoms' section. The symptoms are mentioned briefly in the 'Diagnosis' section but that was very hard to find when I wanted to know quickly for reference. I'm not sure how to make this new section as I am quite new to editing, perhaps someone could help? Spastic on elastic ( talk) 08:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I've recently started taking Lactase supplements to deal with intolerance and it has been quite effective for me. I'd be interested in seeing info on how long the enzyme typically remains in your system and how long it would continue to be effective. For example, if I take a pill with some milk and decide to have another dairy product an hour later, will that dosage likely still be effective? 2 hours later? 4 hours? 65.92.111.88 ( talk) 23:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)hi was up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.97.35.73 ( talk) 19:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
In the Dairy products section of the article, it mentions the percentage of lactose in Human milk as being the highest. Immediately afterwards, it mentions cow milk (family Bovidae) as being 4.7%, and mentions that milk from "other mammals" is similar - listing 4 other Bovidae types of animals. Considering that Bovidae accounts for only 140 species of the 5400 species of mammals (about 2.6%), and all of them are closely related, I think these examples don't necessarily mean much. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to centralize the discussion for now at Talk:Raw_milk#Moved_to_talk_for_discussion -- Ronz ( talk) 03:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I've seen another map where Central-Asian countries had much less lactose intollerance. Even less then south-European countries. Could this be true, since the Turkic peoples were nomads not so long ago and many still are? And there is also the possibility that they mixed with Tocharians and other northern-Europeans from Central-Asia (Chinese sources identify these people as red-haired and blue eyed). Intollerance in Turkey was low in this map too. [5] NeoRetro ( talk) 08:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
variant
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Someone needs to go around a revise some of the things written. There are info on here citing paper from 1970's and these are the ones that's causing some problem like "chinese have near 100% lactose intolerance". Medical papers that are older than 30 years are usual not of strong relevence unless it has been proven over and over to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.9.148 ( talk) 01:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I have read papers that say the Spanish are 60% lactose INtolerant, not 85% lactose tolerant as claimed here. What is the source of this claim of 85% lactose tolerance in Spain? The link here seems here to go to a blog which in turn gives no source. Jenston ( talk) 14:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Lactose intolerance/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
I believe that this article is biased. Most of the people that I know and know of who are lactose intolerant are African-American and/or other minorities. I feel that there is no authority to report on this subject since the only people tested for intolerance to lactose were those who are not intolerant based on the chart extimation contained herein. It seems as if a bit more field work should be done and less book work from those who don't know about what they are talking. The article also presents poor demographic data showing 'lactose intolerance by group', as the data shows studies on very small groups of populations. For example, a percentage intolerance for the entire Maasai people based on a study of only 21 individuals could be highly inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.143.8 ( talk) 10:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
Last edited at 10:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 15:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance here refer to lactase non-persistence, its completely different from the lactose intolerance in newborns and the lactose intolerance cause by bacteria infection, or even the milk allergic. Isuzu1001 ( talk) 23:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I also had trouble finding a mention of symptoms; at first glance it seems like there are no obvious symptoms apart from not getting as much nutrients. But looking closer it seems it is covered in the oddly-named “Overview” section (which the previous reader didn’t even pick up on). Surely overview is part of what the WP:lead section is meant to be. I think I’ll quickly merge the two. Vadmium ( talk) 02:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC).
I like the proposal a lot.
@WOW: Primary and Secondary are most likely referring to Comorbidity of lactose intolerance in a patient. Primary would be a something like an enzyme deficiency, whereas secondary would be a side effect from another disease. The disease that pops up commonly in my searches as temporarily causing lactose intolerance is Celiac disease. Also, gastroenteritis (stomach flu) and food poisoning commonly causes secondary lactose intolerance.
A page discussing Celiac disease and lactose intolerance
I edited a number questionable statements in the foods content which had spurious references. I'm sure there's more work to be done, though. Dwlocks ( talk) 06:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Does the [by whom?] tag really need to be there after the words "A counterargument to this is.."? It's a counterargument whether there's anybody out there making it or not. You don't need citations for points of practical reason.
60.242.254.47 ( talk) 10:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC) Tom
I've been trying to get to grips with this article in my head for a couple of hours now. I'm confused by it. Judging by the talk page, so are a lot of people. They come to the article looking for information on a medical condition, and they're confused by all the talk of percentages and what's "normal"; or they come here looking for information on an evolutionary trait, and they find only jumbled lists of statistics using inconsistent terminology. I think the core problem is that this article conflates several concepts: lactose intolerance, lactose malabsorption, lactase deficiency and lactase persistence. Not without reason of course; they're all facets of the same phenomena. But because those facets fall into different areas of academic study there are wide discrepancies in approach and terminology, discrepancies which this article makes a bit of a mess of dealing with. My proposal is that this article will only see significant improvement if it is able to commit to one approach, one set of terminology, and therefore it must be split into two:
I think the result would be two much cleaner, much more coherent, and much more understandable articles. — Joseph Roe Tk• Cb, 19:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance is not a disease or a malfunction, so it does not deserve to be called a 'medical condition'. No more than menopause is a 'medical condition'. Some women are menopaused very early, others very late, but menopause is natural. Creating some sort of separate article calling this a medical condition is unscientific and un-encyclopedic.-- Tallard ( talk) 16:23, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
It is true that a large body of our knowledge on the phenomenon of lactose intolerance is courtesy of medical research. Indeed awareness of the phenomenon, or condition (in the broad sense - as in 'life is a condition') likely arose from medical inquiries into why some people could tolerate milk and some reacted badly (we now know that lactase persistence is a minority condition and lactose intolerance a majority one - but this is retrospecive knowledge). A great deal of our knowledge of human biology arose as a derivative of medical inquiry, and so has been subsumed into the dominant medical paradigm of the time, including attempts to answer questions like "how can we treat this condition?" in the narrow, medical sense. Research funding is another factor: research is not cheap. The researcher may be interested in broader questions than the funder, who or which has to get a return for expenditure. We now know of course that lactose intolerance and lactase persistence are two sides of the same coin, and that the broadest relevant paradigms pertain to evolutionary biology and overlapping areas such as anthropology (both of which in turn have overlapping subsets in medicine). But this awareness is after-the-fact of a body of knowledge built up under the medical paradigm. It's not really an issue: an astute researcher will always encounter relevant information in all sorts of areas under all sorts of paradigms, some of which are sound and some outdated or even ludicrous. The trick, as a tutor once pointed out, is how to think about the information when we find it. Wotnow ( talk) 20:55, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
I propose that ' Lactase persistence vs. lactose intolerance and deficiencies' be merged into ' lactose intolerance', as the former article (an orphan article created 15 December 2010) appears to be a redundant content fork covering exactly the same topic as the latter article. Qwfp ( talk) 21:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Delete newer redundant article-- Tallard ( talk) 14:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Redirect Lactose intolerance to Lactase tolerance. To treat lactose intolerance as a disease makes no more sense than saying black people are a disease! Lactase persistence is the scientific oddity and the article should reflect that.-- Tallard ( talk) 15:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
redirect Came here from NPP, seems a very clear case. HominidMachinae ( talk) 07:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
The only problem with the merger I see is that the medical community is pushing to change the condition from "lactose intolerant" to "lactose non-persistence". Maybe change the title of the original "Lactose Intolerant" page to "Lactose Non-Persistence" to keep up with the medical terminology and then combine the pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen Glansberg ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance, or lactace deficiency should be separated from the lactase persistence/non-persistence information. The ' Lactase persistence vs. lactose intolerance and deficiencies' would be better off as lactase persistence/non-persistence in it's own page. It would make sense for the two to link to each other, but to make it clear, they would be better off in separate pages. I do believe the original vs. page is not needed. Catonsunday ( talk) 03:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Merge & delete There's no reason for the existence of this article. Imagine Reason ( talk) 10:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
We can add to the above Developmental regulation of lactase expression in mammals, which is good and well referenced but not really different in scope from this article. But between these two and the "Lactase persistence" section of this article I think there's easily enough material to fork off a separate lactase persistence article as I suggested above. joe•roe t• c 09:26, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Now, I'm not a stupid person, and I only come to Wikipedia to learn things, however, this article is horrific. I have one main concern. The rehabilitation section says something about "Secondary Lactose intolerance". I have no idea what this is, however, the primary and secondary sections don't even explain the difference between this. It ends up being extremely vague, and confusing as to why either sections exist, because they certainly don't seem to add much, or explain much, this page isn't a statistical report on lactose intolerance, simply put, put statistics with other statistics, and information with other information, and merge the two as rarely as possible, now I have to Google search to find if I might be able to rehabilitate myself :(. Sad face. Anyways, this page is shocking, people have edited and added information without maintaining a structure. For the benefit of everyone who might actually *need* good information (Students, people trying to self diagnose, or learn more about this), please address these issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.235.7 ( talk • contribs)
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 ( talk) 00:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I spent several hours this morning researching and as a consequence edited the symptoms section. I didn't delete anything but added and clarified. I left the structure and the access to more technical information through the references. This afternoon, I returned to find the references and work deleted. It has been replaced with a lengthy "quasi-diagnostic/phramaceutical" piece that has already been tagged for lack of references.
To whoever made the changes: MedLine carries indemnity insurance I don't know if wiki does. In addition Medline carries a disclaimer for their insurance. Wiki doesn't. In my opinion it would have been a simple courtesy to have explained here the reasons for your edit. LookingGlass ( talk) 20:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
This section has some serious issues. Overall, it looks like written by some advocator of milk consumption who wants to persuade you that lactose intolerance is actually no problem at all, and that by not consuming milk you undergo the risk of several nutritional deficiencies. Some statements are simply absurd; one part basically says that "milk is fortified in some countries, therefore in these countries, if you do not consume milk, you have to find other sources, otherwise you will be deficient". If, say, in my country milk were fortified with vitamin C and I stopped consuming milk, would that mean I would develop a vitamin C deficiency? That's simply nonsense, unless there's a verifiable source saying that milk is the only main source of the mentioned nutrients in these countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.176.211.48 ( talk) 12:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
The fork is not serving the article. As stated it is two sides of one coin. So The map of lactose intolerance is also the map for lactose persistence. Do you not think the map should be in this article? Considering most people are lactose intolerant? Obviously I came a little late (before the split). But these articles probably should have been split more carefully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halaqah ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
In the introduction the article states some frequencies with which different tribes become lactose intolerant and provides reference [3] as supporting evidence. When I looked up that publication it does not seem to mention any of the statistics given here. It talks about the correlation between lactose intolerance and a certain type of mutation in the LCT gene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.56.170 ( talk) 23:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
I think I might b lactose intolerant. Anyway. Is this section therefore saying a person without this issue (if it is an issue) can drink 2L of milk and nothing would happen? Like if they drank water? So therefore it is a sliding scale of symptoms. cuz I drink milk all the time, but up until the 4th glass, I thought it was normal for that to happen. -- Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ ( talk) 11:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
On a net search, I can't find a reference or evidence for a link of lactose intolerance to acid reflux. Shouldn't there be a reference on the symptoms list? JohnOFL ( talk) 02:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance is also a continuum not an either/or issue like this article makes people think. This article is a little misleading. It can be a question of degree for many people.
Some people can have a small amount of milk products (such as a few drops in a cup of coffee) and not be too affected to be uncomfortable - while a larger amount may cause serious bowel problems.
Also cream has less lactose than milk so they are not necessarily the same in all lactose intolerant people. Cheese is also different.
So it is not so simple to explain to people who are not lactose intolerant.
I know because I am somewhat lactose intolerant myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.171.192.148 ( talk) 03:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm agnostic on whether we should include File:Laktoseintoleranz-1.svg in this article or not (it's already been added and removed a dozen times). It's not a good map, but it's also the best we have, and an illustration of this type is very helpful.
However, I don't think a citation needed tag is appropriate. The image is attributed, albeit not very precisely, on both its Wikipedia and Commons description pages to the German newspaper Die Zeit. Whether the newspaper cites the source of the data or not I don't know, but that's beside the point; as far as we're concerned the map comes from a reliable source so we can use it. As far as I know it's never been common practice to attribute or source images inline when they're included in an article, so I've removed the tag. joe•roe t• c 08:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed an abundance of statistics on the interenet related to lactose intolerance.
These statistics seem to fly in the face of experience.
1. How do you come up with 70-75% of the world population (4.5 billion people) being Lactose intolerant? i believe this to be a relatively accurate estimate if you factor in the amount of people that will suffer some form of lactose intolerance with age, people tend to gain some malabsorption problem with age and a key one is lactose intolerance via a lactose persistance. 2. How accurate is this estimate? I have seen very little hard evidence except in major countries regarding Lactose Intolerance. This assumption seems to exclude Japanese from lactose tolerance, but Japanese stats show hugely increased milk consumption as do Australian dairy stats for exports to Japan. How is it the Japanese can NOW digest dairy products contrary to received scientific wisdom?
3. Indians are known to be lactose tolerant and we know of the sacred cows of India. Pakistan and Bangladesh are also of the same background. This is a huge part of the world population. Add North America and Europe. Add about half of South America.
4. China is now encouraging the consumption of milk and dairy products. So far, I have not heard of an epidemic of dead Chinese due to Lactose Intolerance.
5. Define Lactose Intolerance. The word intolerance is absolute. The implication is lactose intolerant people cannot eat and cannot digest dairy products. Obviously there are varying degrees of digestibility.
6. What are the true facts behind the statistics. What size are the samples? Where are the samples from? I have read at wrongdiagnosis.com that the stats on Lactose Intolerance are suspect and depend upon extrapolations of data from a very few western countries.
7. Many cultures which herded cattles and goats are able to digest lactose--this includes African and Mongolian herding cultures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.106.169.166 ( talk) 19:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Re. Units... there is a comment that cheese might contain 10% of the lactose of milk. This is meaningless... is this per unit volume, per unit of dried milk solids, or something else? Meaningfull data would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.112.2 ( talk) 22:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the source of the estimate that 75% of adults worldwide show "some decrease in lactase activity" during adulthood? I would suggest that even if this statement is factually correct - which I doubt, by the way - that is not the same as saying that lactose intolerance is the norm. Some decrease in lactose activity is not the same as being intolerant.
I am concerned that there are claims that certain cheeses have very low lactose tolerances, and the reference is the website "ilovecheese.com" - a lobbying group whose primary goal is to increase the demand for cheese. If there were links to research, that would be one thing, but the claims on the site are not backed up by research. This is Citation [31] in this section: Lactose_intolerance#Dairy_products 54.240.196.186 ( talk) 18:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
The map on the article is entirely unscientific. Among other things, why are continents arbitrarily divided at points that do not have any significant correlation to demographics. For example, what does the lines dividing South America or Spain in half even mean? The data itself is also very dubious. The populations of Argentina and Uruguay for instance are around 90% of European origin. It would make a lot more sense for their lactose intolerance to be lower than that of, say, Haiti or Guatemala. Someone above suggests that it might represent native populations. In that case, why are the US, Australia, New Zealand, etc. represented by their current populations? -- 132.183.15.120 ( talk) 18:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worldwide_prevalence_of_lactose_intolerance_in_recent_populations.jpg NmiPortal ( talk) 14:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
The lactose intolerance frequency for some of the countries is marked incorrectly on the map. The table depicts the data which does not go with the markings in the map. e.g. India is shown as 60 - 80 % intolerant as per the map, while the chart shows that that only 20 % of the population is lactose intolerant: on the other hand Italy, which is at an average (northern southern as well as sicily) 80 - 90 % intolerant is 40 - 60. I am sure if it is looked into properly, a lot more anomalies can be found. Request you to please correct it.
Damn lie. Argentina is about 20-30% Native, and most of its maternal lineages are Native. The same is probably true of Uruguay. 177.207.125.121 ( talk) 14:43, 5 January 2014 (UTC)I would like to point out that almost the entire population in Argentina and Uruguay are of exclusively European ancestry
The diagram I added was deleted with text "nonsensical diagram". Well, it's not nonsensical, it's a very well researched diagram. I will not add it again, because I don't wanna get banned for "spamming", but I would like the community to decide, if the diagram should be used again. And if anyone really thinks it's nonsensical, ad least I'd like to hear why (after 2 years of collecting scientific data in various publications) you think so. File: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worldwide_prevalence_of_lactose_intolerance_in_recent_populations.jpg NmiPortal ( talk) 11:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Picky, but
"After the curdling process, lactose is found in the water-based portion (along with whey and casein), but not in the fat-based portion." Of??????
74.190.202.119 ( talk) 22:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Ruthe 74.190.202.119 ( talk) 22:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This line in the lede took me aback:
Surely it's "quadruples" that's meant? Skookum1 ( talk) 02:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
The article gives two causes for the symptoms of lactose intolerance.
1. “...symptoms are caused by insufficient levels of lactase in the lining of the duodenum.”
2. “ Bacteria in the colon can metabolise lactose, and the resulting fermentation produces copious amounts of gas (a mixture of hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and methane) that causes the various abdominal symptoms.”
Which one of these is correct?
Also, under the heading Symptoms the article states "These appear one-half to two hours after consumption”. So this implies that lactose can reach the colon and begin fermenting enough to produce recognisable symptoms in as little as 30 minutes! Is this possible? A test for lactose intolerance is given: the Hydrogen breath test. In this test hydrogen can be detected on the breath 2.5 hours after the ingestion of lactose. Following 2 above, how does the lactose get to the colon and then the hydrogen to the breath in 2.5 hours?
I cannot claim any expertise in this subject, but the article appears contradictory. Perhaps the hydrogen gas is produced in the duodenum? It would certainly fit better with the time scales given for the appearance of symptoms and for the testing methods used. Winstanr ( talk) 11:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Ridiculous Result of '95% of Chinese People have Lactose Intolerance'!!. Totally nonsense at all!!! I have never heard of seen such a big lie and iresponsible manner before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.8.243 ( talk) 17:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance#Lactose_intolerance_by_group —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikievil666 ( talk • contribs) 18:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I would also like to see the sources used for the map. It's surprising to see countries like Argentina and Uruguay (whose population is almost entirely composed of european immigrants) having the very same values of the surrounding countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.76.177.72 ( talk) 12:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
In the part that shows " * 1.1 Lactose intolerance by group" - North American Jews stick out (as do the British) for their relatively highly Lactose intolerance. Do environmental factors (like stress, past life circumstances, etc...) play a part in lactose intolerance (the answer is obviously yes, but I'm trying to gauge an idea of how much a part is played). For example, do Indians in India have a lower or higher lactose intolerance than South Asians in America or the UK (don't be surprise with any counter-intuititive observations here - lactose exposure might have some effect on gene expression).
Are there other health problems that may be caused by lactose intolerance, or that are associated with it? Can some of these problems be due to associated genetic causes?
This is probably mentioned on the site, though I'm not sure about it. When I try to have 'raw' milk, it causes problems for me. However, heating the milk makes it digestible. Does heat destroy lactose?
Well, no because studies have shown that it does not in many ways. Heating the milk will actually increase the levels of lactose in the dairy products.
IANAD, raw milk may contain bacteria which, unless killed by heating, may upset your stomach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.122.219.237 ( talk) 18:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Would one of the side effects of milk for cats be bloating? Seems ever since she decided she really had to have milk, she has had bloating
Bloating would not be visible to the eye, unless the cat was furless and real skinny. However cats will whine when they experience discomfort.
It should be noted that if a mammal is taken off milk (voluntarily weaned), the lactase producing cells in the small intestine may stop secreting lactase and therefore "become" lactose intolerant. This is common among stray cats. With pet cats, people often will feed cats milk on an occasional basis, this keeps the cats producing lactase. However, stray cats have usually been properly weaned and if given milk can suffer collics. This is already discussed in Wikipedia cat page.
This lactose intolerance brought on by voluntary weaning also occurs in humans.
Is there a citation for the "majority of humans" claim? A lot of humans seem not to be: most western Europeans and north Americans are not lactose intolerant, Mongolians regularly drink fermented horse milk, and so on. -- Delirium 08:25, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)
there is a recent citation for the "majority of humans", the abstract of which I provide here:
Dbach 15:25, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Annu Rev Genet. 2003;37:197-219
Genetics of lactase persistence and lactose intolerance. Swallow DM.
Galton Laboratory, Department of Biology, University College London, Wolfson House, 4 Stephenson Way, London NW1 2HE, England. dswallow@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk
The enzyme lactase that is located in the villus enterocytes of the small intestine is responsible for digestion of lactose in milk. Lactase activity is high and vital during infancy, but in most mammals, including most humans, lactase activity declines after the weaning phase. In other healthy humans, lactase activity persists at a high level throughout adult life, enabling them to digest lactose as adults. This dominantly inherited genetic trait is known as lactase persistence. The distribution of these different lactase phenotypes in human populations is highly variable and is controlled by a polymorphic element cis-acting to the lactase gene. A putative causal nucleotide change has been identified and occurs on the background of a very extended haplotype that is frequent in Northern Europeans, where lactase persistence is frequent. This single nucleotide polymorphism is located 14 kb upstream from the start of transcription of lactase in an intron of the adjacent gene MCM6. This change does not, however, explain all the variation in lactase expression.
I've also added a couple of cites to the article. It's true that most northern Europeans, and thus most Americans, who are largely descended from northern Europeans, have adult lactose tolerance. This is due to a mutation in northern Europe that seems to have happened after domestication of cattle, and use of dairy in the diet in that area around 7000 years ago. However, Europeans are a minority of the world population; east Asians and central Africans, for example, are largely lactose intolerant in adulthood, and are more numerous in the world population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warren Dew ( talk • contribs) 17:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
didn't find this very helpful, would rather see a more scientific link.
External link:
http://gerd.msn.com/article.aspx?aid=49
I agree - only concerning the support of the "majority"-claim I fear that nowadays lots of internet resources rely on wikipedia. That's why I never trust Internet information on scientific subjects. I'd rather search PubMed (and will do so)
Dbach 19:14, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I have found a better citation and replace it. Dbach 15:26, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If a human is lactose intolerant, are they intolerant to all milk, regardless of whether it came from a human or other mammal? Do humans became lactase non-persistent after weaning from human milk, or does this only apply to other mammalian milk? Most of the (scientific) literature I pull up only talks about general dairy, not human dairy. -- Westendgirl 19:36, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Many doctors I have discussed lactose intolerance with have said the opposite. There are occasional cases of humans who become lactose intolerant following weaning, such as following a vegan diet or non dairy vegetarian diet. Lactose intolerance due to weaning is also common among stray cats. You will find that most pet cats who are fed milk throughout their lives are fine versus many stray cats are lactose intolerant and will experience discomfort if given milk. Of course there may be a combination of factors at work here but it nonetheless exists-- Tallard 18:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Before I change it, does anyone know what's up with the last paragraph: "uncomfortable phases of life... (like urination)." and "the minority Western European group should be labeled as suffering from lactase persistence." This all seems a little silly. Anyone care to defend it? chihowa 14:33, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I've been researching this subject for a while (not scientifically, just because I'm curious) and I've found no mention of lactose intolerance being caused by a mutation on chromosome 2. What I've read is that there is a change in the translation of the lactase gene after the weaning period in most of the Earth's people. Here's one link: [ http://www.emedicine.com/PED/topic1270.htm ] -- Bobsky 19:51, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article refers to "western eurasians" but does not link to any of the articles on Eurasians. Which kind is being referred to? Does "western eurasian" include northern americans? If it clearly relates to an existing article we should create a link so there is no confusion. - Tεx τ urε 23:09, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"Western Eurasian" clearly refers to the people of Western Eurasia (to avoide having to list a half a dozen regions) and people descendant from that origin. It is after all first and foremost a geographical term. A link to the article on
Eurasia would be more appropiate, but not really necessary.
I'm "Black" and I can drink fresh milk. But I also have pale skin and red hair, so whatever.
Here I am in Japan and people are drinking milk and eating cheese like crazy. If they're lactose intolerant they don't show any symptoms. Come to think of it, doesn't the word "intolerant" imply something stronger than "unable to digest"? After all, I'm unable to digest grass, but I don't go around calling myself "grass intolerant".
The first time I heard this "only white folk can digest milk" idea, it was on a vegan propaganda site. I considered it highly suspect at the time. This article provides more credible scientific-sounding information, but given the lack of solid sources, isn't it possible Wikipedia is being duped by anti-dairy propaganda?
-- 221.249.13.34 06:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
hadn't evolved the genetic basis of lactose tolerance were completely unable to benefit from milk, it's hard to see how selection on those genes could have begun. 68.35.68.100 14:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I was surprised to see the claim in this article that 98% of South-East Asians are lactose-intolerant. Everyone in my Vietnamese family drinks cow's milk regularly, and I definitely saw dairy products for sale when I visited Vietnam myself. I'd like to see where this data is coming from. I'm wondering if this is the med school equivalent of an urban myth. Scientivore ( talk) 18:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Around 95% of Chinese and SE Asians are lactose intolerant?! Odd, very odd. Does that apply to Powdered milk (fresh milk being rare and expensive)?
Somewhat intolerant sounds like an oxymoron. We need a new term to replace 'lactose intolerant' as most people tolerate it well enough. I have lived in China for six years and have asked many Chinese about this. None of them know anyone who is lactose intolerant. I see Chinese drinking cow's milk daily. Scientists get their statistics from breath or blood measurements, not from talking to people. Wikievil666 ( talk) 18:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm wondering if "lactase persistency" can be categorized either as a dominant or recessive trait? E.g. what phenotype will an offspring, parented by a lactose intolerant and lactase persistent person, be? -anonymous 04:03, 5 August, 2005 (UTC)
This section is misnamed? Etiology means is the study of causation of a problem, as such one should discuss genetic mutations in populations, and effect of (usually) temporary lactose intolerance after a bout of gastroenteritis (especially in children and after giardiasis infections). The current section is more about the consequences of being lactase deficient, ie why this causes the symptoms that it does. A better title for current section might be 'Symptomatology' or 'Pathophysiology of symptoms'. David Ruben talk 19:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Just how relevant are the statistics in the data table if the sample sizes of some groups are in the 20s? I understand it probably reflects the population very roughly, but if anyone can find a similar study with larger sample sizes I think that would make a stronger point.
Its seems to me that there is unfaith in the "condition" of lactose intolerance.
As for a fact it does exist. 1 out of 6 finnish simply get bloating, stomach ache and diarrhea for digesting milk products. As milk still strongly exists in our traditional diet, the scientists have developed a range of milk products, where the lactose has chemically been removed and are widely available at the stores. No need to remember to take additives before the meal or look for other ways of getting calcium to our diets. As this is patented invention, I recommend people in need for these to contact VALIO ltd. on importing these to you.
There's a section in the text that reads "In 2001, a Finnish research group developed "HYLA" products, which are milk products low in lactose, ranging from .." I was born in Finland in 1982, and I don't remember a time without HYLA products, but then again those were (and are) UHT stuff, not made with the cromatography method, I think .. but in any case: in it's current form the section gives the false impression that HYLA is a marking mainly associated with something developed in 2001 (I think Valio released "Evolus" products in 2001?) ..
The article implies the existence of a 'dairy allergy'. Does anyone have any information on the prevalence of this? If it exists as stated in the article, affecting people who ingest both milk and hard cheese, then what I (and my doctor) have been calling lactose intolerance is actually a dairy allergy (as I react on both). -- Kickstart70 21:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
to User Kickstart70 and others this information on dairy allergies should be included in the article titled "Milk Allergy". Some reference between these pages should be made so that the distinction between Lactose Intolerance and Milk Allergy would be clear. alexselkirk1704 16Jun06
I added the statements about the Fulani people in the History of Genetic Prevalence. They were once a nomadic dairy consuming people and I thought it would enrich the article by adding a small blurb about them.
Leward03 18:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Are there any studies on lactose intolerance in India, and (now this would be where it might get fascinating) on regional and social distribution? Given that the Aryans introduced the cow to India, and only used it for dairy rather than meat-production purposes (and raised not eating cow meat to a religion - and a caste mark) their descendants would probably have very high rates of tolerance, while the descendants of the earlier inhabitants probably would not. Lewis
I agree that India needs to be added to the article. People in India (Hindus at least; I don't know about the Muslim population) drink milk and eat milk products as a staple part of their diet and an important source of protein. This should be noted in the History of Genetic Prevalence section. I am making a brief addition to the sentence "Whatever the precise origin in time and place, most modern Northern Europeans and people of European ancestry show the effects of this mutation (that is, they are able to safely consume milk products all their lives)...", but the article would also benefit from a paragraph about India. That is, did the mutation travel from Europe to India, or vice versa, or is it perhaps an independent mutation? Many Indian languages are related to European languages -- that is, the Indo-European language family includes most European languages and about half of all Indian languages. The mutation for lactase persistence may have travelled along with the ancestral languages, whichever way the migration went (probably from India to Europe). VictoriaWordNerd ( talk) 00:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually I think the migration(s) went both ways, both east and west, the posited ancient Indo-European homeland is thought to have existed somewhere in what is now southern Russia. There is of course still considerable debate on the issue, what is certain is that European and Indian populations share a common heritage, but neither was derived from the other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.90.241 ( talk) 00:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I just want to add my personal thoughts on this article's statement that "Lactose-intolerant adults can drink about 250 ml (8 oz) of milk per day without severe symptoms (McGee 2004) (Swagerty et al. 2002)." I am a lactose-intolerant adult, and if I tried to drink even one glass of milk, I would pay for it. And believe me, I love the taste of dairy products. If I could "cheat" with impunity I would be eating ice cream and pizza on a regular basis. Perhaps I have a more severe form of lactose intolerance than the average afflicted adult, but I think that most people who can consume dairy products in moderation don't self-identify as lactose intolerant.
70.181.11.107 02:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the sources, what they really indicate is that a single adult lifetime dose of 200 ml of milk won't cause major symptoms in most lactase impersistent adults. Well, duh! If you're lactose intolerant and never drink milk, there's a good chance all the intestinal bacteria which digest lactose will die off and not be present. Then if you drink one glass of milk, the lactose has a good chance of passing entirely through the digestive system without incident. I know from personal experience, though, that if a lactose intolerant adult tries this on a regular basis, the lactose digesting bacteria will soon be back and you'll be back to having symptoms from as little as a tablespoon of milk. Unfortunately, the dairy industry has a lot more money to fund studies than we do. Warren Dew ( talk) 19:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
We say:
But the map we display right below, whose data is attributed to a 1972 Scientific American article, shows that it's only the southern third or so of Africa (the southern half of sub-saharan Africa) where "most" people are lactose-intolerant, while the middle third (the northern half of sub-saharan Africa, e.g. Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon) seems to have populations who are mostly lactose-tolerant. We also say that some scientists think there was an independent more recent mutation in East Africa. Are there additional (maybe more recent) sources with better data we can cite to clear this up? -- Delirium 06:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Thirdy Jim James Beijing
I wish to inform everybody that the American Academy of Pediatrics have just published its latest clinical report "Lactose Intolerance in Infants, Children, and Adolescents" in the September 2006 issue of its peer-reviewed and scientific journal, Pediatrics.
You may read thru the full text of the report at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/3/1279 or download the free PDF document version.
I hope all of you can find some level of satisfaction. Please read the article carefully. THIRDY
I would remove this map, because it's ridiculously uninformative. Of all continents, only in Africa there is more than three countries not classified as "no data", and the footer says: "African countries are only a rough guess". So, there are only six countries in the whole world, for which the map has any sense! -- Grzes 14:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The map is a work in progress, and as we collect more data, it can become more accurate. If you dislike the paucity of data in our map, I would humbly suggest that you help us find more well-sourced data! There is a lot on the internet, and I have tracked down about 2/3 of the current data listed in our table. I am sure I have not exhausted what exists on this topic, however, and a lot more could be done. I just temporarily ran out of energy for this enterprise. Another difficult arises when there are different populations in an area with widely different rates of lactose intolerance. For example, many indigenous populations have very different rates of lactose intolerance than immigrants, especially from Europe. So the Ainu and the Japanese exhibit different rates of lactose intolerance. Native Americans and European Americans have different rates of lactose intolerance, and so on. Perhaps we can consider a different type of display, such as two maps; one for indigenous populations and one for immigrant populations. I am not sure. Suggestions are welcome.-- Filll 19:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
This map seems to me especially problematic for Africa. According to the article lactose tolerance developed independently in Europe and East Africa and yet all three East African countries (Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda) are shaded in the "91%-100% intolerant" colour. Also, a slew of countries in West and Central Africa are apparently mostly lactose tolerant despite the article stating that Sub-Saharan Africans are generally lactose intolerant. The only reasoning I could find in the article for this was that these countries all seem to be in the geographical distribution of the Fulani people, who, according to the article, are mostly lactose tolerant. But the Fulani are an ethnic minority in these countries, so their rate of lactose tolerance would not be indicative of the rate of lactose tolerance in the general population. One other issue is that in South Africa nearly 20% of the population has at least some European ancestry (whites and coloureds), the majority of which is northern European. And lactose tolerance being a "dominant" gene wouldn't that indicate that a person with full or partial northern European ancestry would most likely be lactose tolerant? This would put the figures of lactose intolerance lower than "91%-100%". In general I feel like if most of the African countries are just "rough guesses" than the information shouldn't really be there. Madritor ( talk) 23:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance#Lactase-enzyme_medication does not cite anything. All I can find when googling for lactase medication are fishy supplement vendors. Pubmed has ( PMID 12712706 & PMID 11906576) very little about the subject. Can someone find double-blind trials, stuff like that?
-- Stereo 03:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
We need an updated version of our map, now that we have more data. One of the references also shows a map to compare with, from the lecture of a Professor at University of Alabama. -- Filll 02:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
SHIBUYA, S., F. YAMASHITA, T. FUNATSU, Fr AL. Lactose intolerance in Japanese children. Advan. Med. (Japan.) 72: 323, 1970.
The relative frequency of acquired primary hypolactasia has been determined in adult Maoris, Samoans and Europeans by measuring an alteration in breath hydrogen concentration two hours after a 50 g oral lactose load. By this indirect measurement hypolactasia was present in 64% of Maoris, 54% of Samoans and 9% of Europeans. The differences between Maoris and Europeans (p less than 0.001) and between Samoans and Europeans (p less than 0.001) were significant.
Lactose malabsorption was studied by a breath hydrogen technique in 139 Samoan and 68 white schoolchildren. The Samoans were studied in four locations, two in Western Samoa and two in New Zealand, and the white children in both the Cook Islands and New Zealand. The prevalence of malabsorption varied with location: for Samoans it ranged from 41% to 60% in Western Samoa and 0% to 35% in New Zealand; white children had rates of 27% in the Cook Islands and 5% in New Zealand. Environmental factors rather than genetic factors are likely to play the main part in initiating if not perpetuating lactose malabsorption. In both races lactose malabsorption had no effect on the acceptance of, consumption of, and number of gastrointestinal symptoms caused by milk and milk biscuits. Children who had symptoms after consuming a particular dairy product were more likely to say they disliked it than those who reported no symptoms.
The breath hydrogen test (BHT) was adapted for use in young infants and children. The diagnostic criterion of sugar malabsorption in the BHT was determined by oral administration of 0.5 g/kg of unabsorbable sugar (lactulose) to 21 healthy infants and children. A maximum increase in breath hydrogen less than 0.05 ml/min per m2 was observed in all subjects. A good correlation between results by the BHT and by the ordinary lactose tolerance test was obtained after oral administration of 2 g/kg lactose to 21 healthy infants and children, 2 congenital lactase-deficient infants, and 7 adults. Using this test, 80 healthy Japanese infants and children (aged between one month and 15 years) and 18 adults were examined for lactose malabsorption after a dose of 1 g/kg lactose. All infants and children under 2-years old absorbed lactose completely. The incidence of lactose malabsorption was 30% in 3-year, 36% in 4-year, 58% in 5-year, and 86% in 6-year-old children, 85% in schoolchildren, and 89% in adults. Thus the incidence of lactase deficiency gradually increases with age from 3 years, and about 90% of all normal Japanese adults are lactase-deficient.
1. Alzante, H. Gonzalez, H. and Guzman, J. “Lactose intolerance in South American Indians.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 22: 122, (1969).
2. Amiot, D., Hioco, D. and Durlach, J. “Frequence du deficit magnesique chez le sujet et dans diverses osteopathies.” J. Med. Besancon 5:371-378, (1969).
3. Aurbach, GD., Marx, S.J. and Spiegel, AM. ”Parathyroid Hormone, Calcitonin, and Calciferols.” In textbook of Endocrinology, Williams, RH. (Ed), Saunders Co., 922-1032, (1981).
4. Aviolo, LV. “Postmenopausal osteoporosis: prevention versus cure.” Fed. Proc. 40: 2418, (1981).
5. Briscoe, A.M. and Ragen, C. “Relation of magnesium on calcium metabolism in man.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 19: 296-306, (1966).
6. Bryan, W.T.K. and Bryan, M.P. ”Cytotoxic Reactions in the Diagnosis of Food Allergy.” Otol. N. Am. 4: 523-533, (1971).
7. Bygrave, F.L. “Cellular Calcium and Magnesium Metabolism.” In An Introduction to Bio-inorganic Chemistry. Williams, D. R. (Ed) Thomas, 171-184, (1976).
8. Cook. G.C. and Kajubi, SK. “Tribal incidence of lactase deficiency in Uganda.” Lancet l: 725, (1966).
9. Davidson, S., Passmore. R., Brock, J.F. and Truswell, AS. “Human Nutrition and Dietetics.” Churchill Livingstone, 166-175, (1979).
10. Davidson, S., Passmore, R., Brock, J.F. and Truswell, A.S. “Human Nutrition and Dietetics.” Churchill Livingstone, 90-106. (1979).
11. Draper, H.H. and Scythes, C.A. ”Calcium, phosphorous, and osteoporosis.” Fe. Proc. 40: 2434, (1984).
12. DuRuisseau, J.P. and Marineau, J.M. “Osteoporose medication calcique et magnesienne,” See Int’l Sympos on Magnesium, 223-226, (1971/1973).
13. Gilat, T., et. al. “Lactase deficiency in Jewish communities in Israel.” Am J. Digest. Dis. 16:203, (1971).
14. Gilat. T., et. al “Lactose intolerance in an Arab population.” Am. J. Digest. Dis. 16:203, (1977)
15. Gudmand-hoyer, and F., Jarnum, S. “Lactose malabsorption in Greenland Eskimos.” Acta Med. Scand. 186:235, (1969).
16. Holick, M.F. and Clark, MB. “The photobiogenesis and metabolism of Vitamin D.” Fed. Proc. 37: 2567-2574, (1978).
17. Huang, S.S. and Bayless, T.M. “Milk and lactose intolerance in healthy orientals.” Science 160: 83, (1968).
18. Johnson, J.D., et. al. “Lactose malabsorption among the Pima Indians of Arizona.” Gastroenterology 73: 985, (1977).
19. Kretchmer, N., et.al. “Intestinal absorption of lactose in Nigerian ethnic groups.” Lancet 2: 392, (l971).
20. Larkins, R.G., McAuley, S.J., Colston, K.W., Evans, I.M.A., Galante, L.S. and Macintyre, I. “Regulation of Vitamin D. Metabolism without Parathyroid Hormone.” Lancet: 289-291, (1973).
21. Linkswiler, H.M., Zemel, M.B., Hegsted, M., and Schuette, S. “Protein-induced hypercalciuria.” Fed. Proc. 40:2429, (1981).
22. MacIntyre, I. “Vitamin D and the integration of Calcium Regulating Hormones.” In First European Symposium on hormones and Cell Regulation. Dumont, J. and Nunez. J. (Ed) North Holland, 195-208, (1977).
23. Nasrallah, SM. “Lactose intolerance in the Lebanese population and in ‘Mediterranean lymphoma’.” Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 32:1994-1996, (1979).
24. Newcomer, AD., et. al. “Family studies of lactose deficiency in the American Indian.” Gastroenterology 73; 1299, (1977).
25. Parlier. R., Hioco, D. and LeBlanc, R. “Les troubles du metacolisme magnesien. Symptomes et traitment des carences et des plethores magnesiennes.” Rev. Franc. Endocr. Clin. 4: 335-339, (1963).
26. Rude, R.K., Bethune, J.E. and Singer, F.R. “Renal tubular maximum for magnesium in normal, hyperparathyroid and hypoparathyroid man.” J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 51: 1425-1431, (1980).
27. Schrier, R.W. and Leaf, A. “Effect of Hormones on Water, Sodium, Chloride, and Potassium Metabolism.” In Textbook of Endocrinology, Williams RH. (Ed) Saunders Co., 1032-
28. Seelig, MS. “Magnesium Deficiency in the Pathogenesis of Disease.” Plenum Medical Book Company, 3 17-321, (1980).
29. Seeman, E. and Riggs, B.L. “Dietary prevention of bone loss in the elderly.” Geriatrics 36:71-79, (1981).
30. Senewiratne, B., et. al. “Intestinal lactase deficiency in Ceylon (Sri Lanka).” Gastroenterology 72:1257, (1977).
31. Shibuya, S. et. al. “Lactose intolerance in Japanese children.” Advan. Med (Japan). 72:323, (1970). -- Filll 02:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm a bit puzzled by:
"In America over recent years (1990–2000) there has been a notable increase of available lactose-reduced and lactose-free dairy products; examples being cottage cheese, American cheese and ice cream."
I just haven't found this to be true. I'll agree that there has been a notable increase of lactose-free dairy products. I can get lactose-free milk and at this time of year eggnog everywhere, and I'm not limited in choice either. I can get fatfree, 1%, 2& or regular milk, and there are multiple companies. I also know that there is lactose free cheese and ice-cream carried at some specialty places though soy is much more common. There are a few products which utilize lactose free products--there is a frozen mac and cheese which is lactose free. But I've never seen lactose free cottage cheese, or anything else really. And the only thing that I can get with ease is milk and eggnog. Cheese and ice cream are harder to find.
I can get almost everything soy--soy ice cream, sour cream, cream cheese, milk, eggnog, yoghurts and cheeses of every variety, everything. And while having a soy alternative for every product in existence is nice, it's not the same as having lactose free milk products. I'm really confused by this article saying that there has been a resurgence starting 16, or well now 17 years ago, that includes products I simply can't find 17 years later TStein 10:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I remember reading about how the Masai, even though they exhibit certain features of lactose intolerance by western tests, still can consume milk without ill effects. So there is some confusion about what lactose intolerance really means and what the tests are measuring. There is some other processes involved here. Anyone know anything about this?-- Filll 23:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I do not understand why most of the table listing frequency of lactose intolerance in the column "Allele frequency" says "N/A"? Since the gene is recessive the allele frequency should be equal to the square root of the frequency of the population that is lactose intolerant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.180.136.145 ( talk) 15:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
THANKS FOR THE LACTOSE CURE. I ALWAYS GO TO WIKIPEDIA FOR CURE CUZ ER1 IN THE WORLD DONT KNOW. I HAD HICCUPS BEFORE N WIKIPEDIA CURED ME SO KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. ALSO I GOT LACTOSE INTOLERANT CUZ I WAS DRINKING MILK ERDAY THEN STOPPED FOR A MONTH N SOMIN FUCKED UP —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.195.132.253 ( talk) 04:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC).
Although one source says that up to 75% of South Americans are intolerant, this shouldn't be taken as uniform for every South American country. I don't think that Bolivia, for example, with 75% of native population has the same percentage of Argentina, which is 97% white according to the CIA World Factbook. If the figure is taken as unique for all South America, then the national borders should be deleted from the map. Also, Tierra del Fuego is part of South America.-- cloviz 14:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Of course you are free to write it here. But this all takes work. And if you volunteer to do the work, then it would be appreciated.-- Filll 01:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
A book I was reading for a nutrition course mentions "Lactose maldigestion" but I do not see it here.
Gordon and Smith (2006) state the following about primary and secondary lactose maldigestion:
"Primary lactose maldigestion
occurs when production of the enzyme
lactase declines for no apparent reason.
Secondary lactose maldigestion occurs when
a specific cause, such as long-standing
diarrhea, results in a decline in lactase
production. When significant symptoms
develop after lactose intake, it is then called
lactose intolerance" (p. 138).
Wardlaw, Gordon M., & Smith, Anne M. (2006). Contemporary Nutrition : Issues and Insights (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
ISBN 0–07–250185–5
Hi, I'm new at this, I'm sorry. Have a nice day :) Tortellini
05:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems that we know that most humans have some level of lactose intolerance. And we know that among those humans, the level of lactose tolerance varies. *** It may be useful to give a definition of a threshold level, to separate out tolerance from intolerance, at least for medical purposes, if doctors have set one. And it might even be of a little use to give an idea of how much lactose an "average" intolerant person can tolerate. But the main thrust should be to give a clear concept of the great range of tolerance among the intolerant. - 69.87.204.193 21:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems like I can take milk with oatmeal in the morning with no problems. But milk or ice cream in the evening lead to "intestinal distress". Maybe just because the milk with the oatmeal is a small amount. But maybe milk with food is less of a problem than milk alone? - 69.87.204.193 21:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a dispute about whether this article (and possibly other articles) are may be used as a platform for original research for the sake of being "helpful to people needing to reduce their symptoms", as put by the contributor of the sections containing the original research. 18:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
The user Tallard has contributed two paragraphs to the article, whose current content is as follows:
I became lactose intolerant almost a year ago. I started taking these once-daily pills that have been working great ever since. It's call Digestive Advantage for Lactose Intolerance. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? Are there any similar products? Danny 18:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
the drugs used to avoid the symptoms of lactose intolerance contain an enzyme that digests the lactose for the patient (lactose intolerant patients are missing this enzyme (lactase))
I apologize for mucking up the edit history with repeated edits; I'm quite new at this. Nearly all the edits were corrections of a word or two from what I'd added previously; the more substantial portions are pretty much cleanups and additions of uncontroversial information. I hope anyone trying to follow them won't be too angry that I haven't made it as easy as I should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.212.74.209 ( talk) 07:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC).
Frequency of lactose intolerance in Eastern Slavs is evaluated as 40-50% (but not 15%) according to measuring the blood glucose level after lactose ingestion and according to DNA analysis of population samples of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians. Frequency of lactose intolerance in indigenous peoples of Sibera is more than 90%. Valenkevich and his colleagues ([9] in table 'Lactose intolerance by group') used some unusual criteria of lactose intolerance diagnosis resulting in understated of intolerance and two or three fold lower frequency of intolerance.
See Borinskaya et al., Molecular diagnosis and frequencies of primary hypolactasia in populations of RUSSIA and neighboring countries]// Mol Biol (Mosk). 2006 Nov-Dec;40(6):1031-6 (in Russian). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17209431&query_hl=8&itool=pubmed_docsum
The journal Molecular Biology is available online by http://springeronline.com/journal/11008 ISSN (online): 1608-3245
See also Kozlov A., Lisitsyn D. History of dairy cattle-breeding and distribution of LAC*R and LAC*P alleles among European populations // In: C.Renfrew & K.Boyle (Eds). Archaeogenetics: DNA and the population prehistory of Europe. — Cambridge: McDonald Institute for archaeological Research, 2000, 309-313.
213.141.131.93 08:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
"Other dairy products, except butter and milk-protein supplements, are similarly rich in calcium and potassium; none, however, are normally fortified with vitamins A or D. Dairy substitutes, such as soy or rice, are not naturally rich in calcium, potassium, or vitamins A or D (and, like all nonanimal products, contain no vitamin B12). Prominent brands of these products, however, are often voluntarily fortified with many of these nutrients (this is typically advertised prominently on the packaging, since it is not required by law)....."
Someone seems to have forgotten that America is not the only country in the world. The details above would vary from country to country. I believe Wikipedia is being written for an international audience, not just a USA one.--—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
The reference #2 (soynutrition.com link) does not support the preceding wikipedia statements about recessive genes. In fact, the article states nothing about genetics. Can anyone back up that information? Jwigton 04:50, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this list could do with being a little more extensive, such as the one found here: http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/digestive-health/nutrition/lactosecontent.pdf Perhaps not all of them (does anybody really need to know the lactose content of 1/2 a cup of orange sherbert?). Also, perhaps it would be a good idea to do a little maths and use the same weight of each foodstuff for comparison (say per 100g). Anyway, I'm much too tired to do anything about it right now, but I'll check back in a few days. Lewyblue 03:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Rcej, I am not arguing that Wikipedia should not give lay medical advice. Which is why I rewrote the paragraph to take any medical presumption out of it. Now it's strictly a food tolerance paragraph. But the fact is most doctors do not bother performing the above cited diagnostic tests on regular patients, they just say live with it or take supplements, because lactose intolerance is not considered a medical disease. So as long as this paragraph remains in the food realm there is not reproachable. Furthermore, this section used to be 4 paragraphs long. I perceive your Wikipedia philosophy may slant a little toward deletionist, but in this case I believe going from 4 paragraphs to 2 lines is perfectly suitable for the article-- Tallard 01:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
This is, of course, anecdotal...I have apparently been cured of lactose intolerance though not in a great way. Last year I underwent a partial thyroidectomy (to remove a lump that suddenly appeared). During the course of healing I developed a severe MRSA infection which required strong antibiotics to treat. Those antibiotics killed a large amount of my normal intestinal bacteria and allowed c. difficile to proliferate, which was preventing me from properly digesting food. After a round of strong antibiotics to treat that, I have slowly worked my way up to apparently digesting dairy products which would previously cause me considerable discomfort without issue. Today I had pizza for lunch and lasagna for dinner (yeah, unhealthy, but it proves my point).
Of course this is not a routine I would suggest to anyone. I only bring this up to see if anyone knows of similar events or studies of events that have caused a similar result in other people. If so, those studies (full cited) could perhaps be used here. -- Kickstart70- T- C 02:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Tallard, in the article, the syntax "..where mother's milk is the only commonly available source of milk.." is just a poorly written, horridly silly way to try to explain the direct meaning. There is no dairy consumption after weaning, because in many of those Asian and African cultures... there is no dairy industry, nor commercial dairy consumption occuring period. The exclusive availabilty of mother's milk is not the issue; but, the fact that beyond infancy, there will be no dairy consumption is the issue. And also, these are not the reasons children become weaned... weaning always occurs, regardless of culture. I know you did not mean it to read that way, but often, things need to be written in reasonable, even obvious terms.-- Rcej 01:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I just read the article for the first time and really appreciated it, especially since I had no clue how lactase "non-persistence" worked before now. I am a bit baffled by the 2nd sentence, though: "from a world view, lactose intolerance can be regarded as 'normal' for humans whereas lactose tolerance may be considered a form of neoteny." Is it an encyclopedia's job to say what's normal and what's abnormal? And are only people over 4 years old humans? Or are children under 4 years old also humans? Just seems a bit off. TrickyApron ( talk) 08:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The lead section needs work per WP:LEAD. In general, it should be a summary of the article. As is, it doesn't summarize the article well, while introducing a great deal of material about the three major types of lactose intolerance that is not expanded upon in the rest of the article as one would expect. I think the discussion on the three types should be moved to within the article proper, near the beginning of course, and the lead section then expanded and modified to be more of a summary. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
There are three major types of lactose intolerance [1]:
What happened to this material? It seems necessary and it seems to be well-cited. In the current article "Secondary lactose intolerance" is introduced towards the end of the article with no explanation. -- Kvng ( talk) 16:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
According to section 6.2 of this article, entitled Lactose Supplementation, "Lactase enzymes similar to the those produced in the small intestines of humans are produced industrially by fungi of the genus aspergillus. The enzyme, β-galactosidase, is available in tablet form in a variety of doses, in many countries without a prescription. It functions well only in high-acid environments, such as that found in the human gut due to the addition of gastric juices from the stomach."
But accoriding to a different article called "Beta-galactosidase" (I'd add the link, but I don't know how), "Lactase is often confused as an alternate name for β-galactosidase, but it is actually simply a sub-class of β-galactosidase." So isn't this article just saying that the enzyme Lactase is available in pill form? And if that's the case, how does the enzyme, which has an optimum Ph level of 6.5, survive the low 1-2 Ph of stomach acid without being denatured? I actually came to this article looking for the answer to that question: How do chewable Lactase tablets make it to the intestines without being denatured? But even if no one has the answer to that specific question, this section is still somewhat unclear. 80.84.191.33 ( talk) 21:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
This page is complete bull. Eastern europeans drink milk like it's water and eat cheese with every meal. So do mongolians. Mongolian herders practically survive on mare's milk for several months out of the year. How can they be 50% intolerant? Same with sicilians that are supposed to be intollerant but all the sicillians I've met drink milk. Here's a newsflash: if you drink milk in Sicily you won't feel well because it's very hot and humid there. That not only causes extra bacteria in the milk but also discomfort because of the fat content. I know because I've don eit. Can anyone explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.68.72 ( talk) 06:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
In the lead section it is said that "[i]t is estimated that 20% of adult humans are lactose intolerant". However, in the Diagnosis section it reads "[s]ince lactose intolerance is the normal state for most adults on a worldwide scale [...]". So, what percentage of adults humans are lactose intolerant? If only 20 percent, it is not "the normal state for most adults". -- Victor Chmara ( talk) 12:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The section on lactose intolerance in India, north vs south, references a very old study. The basic premise of that study has been disproved by genetic surveys of the last decade - the Indian ethnicity is now considered autochthonous. See the references in the section "Racial groups of India". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.148.237 ( talk) 19:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I believe the article needs to have a dedicated 'Symptoms' section. The symptoms are mentioned briefly in the 'Diagnosis' section but that was very hard to find when I wanted to know quickly for reference. I'm not sure how to make this new section as I am quite new to editing, perhaps someone could help? Spastic on elastic ( talk) 08:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
I've recently started taking Lactase supplements to deal with intolerance and it has been quite effective for me. I'd be interested in seeing info on how long the enzyme typically remains in your system and how long it would continue to be effective. For example, if I take a pill with some milk and decide to have another dairy product an hour later, will that dosage likely still be effective? 2 hours later? 4 hours? 65.92.111.88 ( talk) 23:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)hi was up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.97.35.73 ( talk) 19:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
In the Dairy products section of the article, it mentions the percentage of lactose in Human milk as being the highest. Immediately afterwards, it mentions cow milk (family Bovidae) as being 4.7%, and mentions that milk from "other mammals" is similar - listing 4 other Bovidae types of animals. Considering that Bovidae accounts for only 140 species of the 5400 species of mammals (about 2.6%), and all of them are closely related, I think these examples don't necessarily mean much. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to centralize the discussion for now at Talk:Raw_milk#Moved_to_talk_for_discussion -- Ronz ( talk) 03:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I've seen another map where Central-Asian countries had much less lactose intollerance. Even less then south-European countries. Could this be true, since the Turkic peoples were nomads not so long ago and many still are? And there is also the possibility that they mixed with Tocharians and other northern-Europeans from Central-Asia (Chinese sources identify these people as red-haired and blue eyed). Intollerance in Turkey was low in this map too. [5] NeoRetro ( talk) 08:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
variant
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Someone needs to go around a revise some of the things written. There are info on here citing paper from 1970's and these are the ones that's causing some problem like "chinese have near 100% lactose intolerance". Medical papers that are older than 30 years are usual not of strong relevence unless it has been proven over and over to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.9.148 ( talk) 01:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I have read papers that say the Spanish are 60% lactose INtolerant, not 85% lactose tolerant as claimed here. What is the source of this claim of 85% lactose tolerance in Spain? The link here seems here to go to a blog which in turn gives no source. Jenston ( talk) 14:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Lactose intolerance/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
I believe that this article is biased. Most of the people that I know and know of who are lactose intolerant are African-American and/or other minorities. I feel that there is no authority to report on this subject since the only people tested for intolerance to lactose were those who are not intolerant based on the chart extimation contained herein. It seems as if a bit more field work should be done and less book work from those who don't know about what they are talking. The article also presents poor demographic data showing 'lactose intolerance by group', as the data shows studies on very small groups of populations. For example, a percentage intolerance for the entire Maasai people based on a study of only 21 individuals could be highly inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.143.8 ( talk) 10:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC) |
Last edited at 10:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 15:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance here refer to lactase non-persistence, its completely different from the lactose intolerance in newborns and the lactose intolerance cause by bacteria infection, or even the milk allergic. Isuzu1001 ( talk) 23:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I also had trouble finding a mention of symptoms; at first glance it seems like there are no obvious symptoms apart from not getting as much nutrients. But looking closer it seems it is covered in the oddly-named “Overview” section (which the previous reader didn’t even pick up on). Surely overview is part of what the WP:lead section is meant to be. I think I’ll quickly merge the two. Vadmium ( talk) 02:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC).
I like the proposal a lot.
@WOW: Primary and Secondary are most likely referring to Comorbidity of lactose intolerance in a patient. Primary would be a something like an enzyme deficiency, whereas secondary would be a side effect from another disease. The disease that pops up commonly in my searches as temporarily causing lactose intolerance is Celiac disease. Also, gastroenteritis (stomach flu) and food poisoning commonly causes secondary lactose intolerance.
A page discussing Celiac disease and lactose intolerance
I edited a number questionable statements in the foods content which had spurious references. I'm sure there's more work to be done, though. Dwlocks ( talk) 06:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Does the [by whom?] tag really need to be there after the words "A counterargument to this is.."? It's a counterargument whether there's anybody out there making it or not. You don't need citations for points of practical reason.
60.242.254.47 ( talk) 10:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC) Tom
I've been trying to get to grips with this article in my head for a couple of hours now. I'm confused by it. Judging by the talk page, so are a lot of people. They come to the article looking for information on a medical condition, and they're confused by all the talk of percentages and what's "normal"; or they come here looking for information on an evolutionary trait, and they find only jumbled lists of statistics using inconsistent terminology. I think the core problem is that this article conflates several concepts: lactose intolerance, lactose malabsorption, lactase deficiency and lactase persistence. Not without reason of course; they're all facets of the same phenomena. But because those facets fall into different areas of academic study there are wide discrepancies in approach and terminology, discrepancies which this article makes a bit of a mess of dealing with. My proposal is that this article will only see significant improvement if it is able to commit to one approach, one set of terminology, and therefore it must be split into two:
I think the result would be two much cleaner, much more coherent, and much more understandable articles. — Joseph Roe Tk• Cb, 19:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance is not a disease or a malfunction, so it does not deserve to be called a 'medical condition'. No more than menopause is a 'medical condition'. Some women are menopaused very early, others very late, but menopause is natural. Creating some sort of separate article calling this a medical condition is unscientific and un-encyclopedic.-- Tallard ( talk) 16:23, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
It is true that a large body of our knowledge on the phenomenon of lactose intolerance is courtesy of medical research. Indeed awareness of the phenomenon, or condition (in the broad sense - as in 'life is a condition') likely arose from medical inquiries into why some people could tolerate milk and some reacted badly (we now know that lactase persistence is a minority condition and lactose intolerance a majority one - but this is retrospecive knowledge). A great deal of our knowledge of human biology arose as a derivative of medical inquiry, and so has been subsumed into the dominant medical paradigm of the time, including attempts to answer questions like "how can we treat this condition?" in the narrow, medical sense. Research funding is another factor: research is not cheap. The researcher may be interested in broader questions than the funder, who or which has to get a return for expenditure. We now know of course that lactose intolerance and lactase persistence are two sides of the same coin, and that the broadest relevant paradigms pertain to evolutionary biology and overlapping areas such as anthropology (both of which in turn have overlapping subsets in medicine). But this awareness is after-the-fact of a body of knowledge built up under the medical paradigm. It's not really an issue: an astute researcher will always encounter relevant information in all sorts of areas under all sorts of paradigms, some of which are sound and some outdated or even ludicrous. The trick, as a tutor once pointed out, is how to think about the information when we find it. Wotnow ( talk) 20:55, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
I propose that ' Lactase persistence vs. lactose intolerance and deficiencies' be merged into ' lactose intolerance', as the former article (an orphan article created 15 December 2010) appears to be a redundant content fork covering exactly the same topic as the latter article. Qwfp ( talk) 21:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Delete newer redundant article-- Tallard ( talk) 14:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Redirect Lactose intolerance to Lactase tolerance. To treat lactose intolerance as a disease makes no more sense than saying black people are a disease! Lactase persistence is the scientific oddity and the article should reflect that.-- Tallard ( talk) 15:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
redirect Came here from NPP, seems a very clear case. HominidMachinae ( talk) 07:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
The only problem with the merger I see is that the medical community is pushing to change the condition from "lactose intolerant" to "lactose non-persistence". Maybe change the title of the original "Lactose Intolerant" page to "Lactose Non-Persistence" to keep up with the medical terminology and then combine the pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen Glansberg ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance, or lactace deficiency should be separated from the lactase persistence/non-persistence information. The ' Lactase persistence vs. lactose intolerance and deficiencies' would be better off as lactase persistence/non-persistence in it's own page. It would make sense for the two to link to each other, but to make it clear, they would be better off in separate pages. I do believe the original vs. page is not needed. Catonsunday ( talk) 03:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Merge & delete There's no reason for the existence of this article. Imagine Reason ( talk) 10:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
We can add to the above Developmental regulation of lactase expression in mammals, which is good and well referenced but not really different in scope from this article. But between these two and the "Lactase persistence" section of this article I think there's easily enough material to fork off a separate lactase persistence article as I suggested above. joe•roe t• c 09:26, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Now, I'm not a stupid person, and I only come to Wikipedia to learn things, however, this article is horrific. I have one main concern. The rehabilitation section says something about "Secondary Lactose intolerance". I have no idea what this is, however, the primary and secondary sections don't even explain the difference between this. It ends up being extremely vague, and confusing as to why either sections exist, because they certainly don't seem to add much, or explain much, this page isn't a statistical report on lactose intolerance, simply put, put statistics with other statistics, and information with other information, and merge the two as rarely as possible, now I have to Google search to find if I might be able to rehabilitate myself :(. Sad face. Anyways, this page is shocking, people have edited and added information without maintaining a structure. For the benefit of everyone who might actually *need* good information (Students, people trying to self diagnose, or learn more about this), please address these issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.235.7 ( talk • contribs)
Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 ( talk) 00:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I spent several hours this morning researching and as a consequence edited the symptoms section. I didn't delete anything but added and clarified. I left the structure and the access to more technical information through the references. This afternoon, I returned to find the references and work deleted. It has been replaced with a lengthy "quasi-diagnostic/phramaceutical" piece that has already been tagged for lack of references.
To whoever made the changes: MedLine carries indemnity insurance I don't know if wiki does. In addition Medline carries a disclaimer for their insurance. Wiki doesn't. In my opinion it would have been a simple courtesy to have explained here the reasons for your edit. LookingGlass ( talk) 20:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
This section has some serious issues. Overall, it looks like written by some advocator of milk consumption who wants to persuade you that lactose intolerance is actually no problem at all, and that by not consuming milk you undergo the risk of several nutritional deficiencies. Some statements are simply absurd; one part basically says that "milk is fortified in some countries, therefore in these countries, if you do not consume milk, you have to find other sources, otherwise you will be deficient". If, say, in my country milk were fortified with vitamin C and I stopped consuming milk, would that mean I would develop a vitamin C deficiency? That's simply nonsense, unless there's a verifiable source saying that milk is the only main source of the mentioned nutrients in these countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.176.211.48 ( talk) 12:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
The fork is not serving the article. As stated it is two sides of one coin. So The map of lactose intolerance is also the map for lactose persistence. Do you not think the map should be in this article? Considering most people are lactose intolerant? Obviously I came a little late (before the split). But these articles probably should have been split more carefully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halaqah ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
In the introduction the article states some frequencies with which different tribes become lactose intolerant and provides reference [3] as supporting evidence. When I looked up that publication it does not seem to mention any of the statistics given here. It talks about the correlation between lactose intolerance and a certain type of mutation in the LCT gene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.56.170 ( talk) 23:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
I think I might b lactose intolerant. Anyway. Is this section therefore saying a person without this issue (if it is an issue) can drink 2L of milk and nothing would happen? Like if they drank water? So therefore it is a sliding scale of symptoms. cuz I drink milk all the time, but up until the 4th glass, I thought it was normal for that to happen. -- Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ ( talk) 11:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
On a net search, I can't find a reference or evidence for a link of lactose intolerance to acid reflux. Shouldn't there be a reference on the symptoms list? JohnOFL ( talk) 02:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Lactose intolerance is also a continuum not an either/or issue like this article makes people think. This article is a little misleading. It can be a question of degree for many people.
Some people can have a small amount of milk products (such as a few drops in a cup of coffee) and not be too affected to be uncomfortable - while a larger amount may cause serious bowel problems.
Also cream has less lactose than milk so they are not necessarily the same in all lactose intolerant people. Cheese is also different.
So it is not so simple to explain to people who are not lactose intolerant.
I know because I am somewhat lactose intolerant myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.171.192.148 ( talk) 03:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm agnostic on whether we should include File:Laktoseintoleranz-1.svg in this article or not (it's already been added and removed a dozen times). It's not a good map, but it's also the best we have, and an illustration of this type is very helpful.
However, I don't think a citation needed tag is appropriate. The image is attributed, albeit not very precisely, on both its Wikipedia and Commons description pages to the German newspaper Die Zeit. Whether the newspaper cites the source of the data or not I don't know, but that's beside the point; as far as we're concerned the map comes from a reliable source so we can use it. As far as I know it's never been common practice to attribute or source images inline when they're included in an article, so I've removed the tag. joe•roe t• c 08:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed an abundance of statistics on the interenet related to lactose intolerance.
These statistics seem to fly in the face of experience.
1. How do you come up with 70-75% of the world population (4.5 billion people) being Lactose intolerant? i believe this to be a relatively accurate estimate if you factor in the amount of people that will suffer some form of lactose intolerance with age, people tend to gain some malabsorption problem with age and a key one is lactose intolerance via a lactose persistance. 2. How accurate is this estimate? I have seen very little hard evidence except in major countries regarding Lactose Intolerance. This assumption seems to exclude Japanese from lactose tolerance, but Japanese stats show hugely increased milk consumption as do Australian dairy stats for exports to Japan. How is it the Japanese can NOW digest dairy products contrary to received scientific wisdom?
3. Indians are known to be lactose tolerant and we know of the sacred cows of India. Pakistan and Bangladesh are also of the same background. This is a huge part of the world population. Add North America and Europe. Add about half of South America.
4. China is now encouraging the consumption of milk and dairy products. So far, I have not heard of an epidemic of dead Chinese due to Lactose Intolerance.
5. Define Lactose Intolerance. The word intolerance is absolute. The implication is lactose intolerant people cannot eat and cannot digest dairy products. Obviously there are varying degrees of digestibility.
6. What are the true facts behind the statistics. What size are the samples? Where are the samples from? I have read at wrongdiagnosis.com that the stats on Lactose Intolerance are suspect and depend upon extrapolations of data from a very few western countries.
7. Many cultures which herded cattles and goats are able to digest lactose--this includes African and Mongolian herding cultures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.106.169.166 ( talk) 19:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Re. Units... there is a comment that cheese might contain 10% of the lactose of milk. This is meaningless... is this per unit volume, per unit of dried milk solids, or something else? Meaningfull data would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.112.2 ( talk) 22:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the source of the estimate that 75% of adults worldwide show "some decrease in lactase activity" during adulthood? I would suggest that even if this statement is factually correct - which I doubt, by the way - that is not the same as saying that lactose intolerance is the norm. Some decrease in lactose activity is not the same as being intolerant.
I am concerned that there are claims that certain cheeses have very low lactose tolerances, and the reference is the website "ilovecheese.com" - a lobbying group whose primary goal is to increase the demand for cheese. If there were links to research, that would be one thing, but the claims on the site are not backed up by research. This is Citation [31] in this section: Lactose_intolerance#Dairy_products 54.240.196.186 ( talk) 18:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
The map on the article is entirely unscientific. Among other things, why are continents arbitrarily divided at points that do not have any significant correlation to demographics. For example, what does the lines dividing South America or Spain in half even mean? The data itself is also very dubious. The populations of Argentina and Uruguay for instance are around 90% of European origin. It would make a lot more sense for their lactose intolerance to be lower than that of, say, Haiti or Guatemala. Someone above suggests that it might represent native populations. In that case, why are the US, Australia, New Zealand, etc. represented by their current populations? -- 132.183.15.120 ( talk) 18:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worldwide_prevalence_of_lactose_intolerance_in_recent_populations.jpg NmiPortal ( talk) 14:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
The lactose intolerance frequency for some of the countries is marked incorrectly on the map. The table depicts the data which does not go with the markings in the map. e.g. India is shown as 60 - 80 % intolerant as per the map, while the chart shows that that only 20 % of the population is lactose intolerant: on the other hand Italy, which is at an average (northern southern as well as sicily) 80 - 90 % intolerant is 40 - 60. I am sure if it is looked into properly, a lot more anomalies can be found. Request you to please correct it.
Damn lie. Argentina is about 20-30% Native, and most of its maternal lineages are Native. The same is probably true of Uruguay. 177.207.125.121 ( talk) 14:43, 5 January 2014 (UTC)I would like to point out that almost the entire population in Argentina and Uruguay are of exclusively European ancestry
The diagram I added was deleted with text "nonsensical diagram". Well, it's not nonsensical, it's a very well researched diagram. I will not add it again, because I don't wanna get banned for "spamming", but I would like the community to decide, if the diagram should be used again. And if anyone really thinks it's nonsensical, ad least I'd like to hear why (after 2 years of collecting scientific data in various publications) you think so. File: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worldwide_prevalence_of_lactose_intolerance_in_recent_populations.jpg NmiPortal ( talk) 11:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Picky, but
"After the curdling process, lactose is found in the water-based portion (along with whey and casein), but not in the fat-based portion." Of??????
74.190.202.119 ( talk) 22:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Ruthe 74.190.202.119 ( talk) 22:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This line in the lede took me aback:
Surely it's "quadruples" that's meant? Skookum1 ( talk) 02:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
The article gives two causes for the symptoms of lactose intolerance.
1. “...symptoms are caused by insufficient levels of lactase in the lining of the duodenum.”
2. “ Bacteria in the colon can metabolise lactose, and the resulting fermentation produces copious amounts of gas (a mixture of hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and methane) that causes the various abdominal symptoms.”
Which one of these is correct?
Also, under the heading Symptoms the article states "These appear one-half to two hours after consumption”. So this implies that lactose can reach the colon and begin fermenting enough to produce recognisable symptoms in as little as 30 minutes! Is this possible? A test for lactose intolerance is given: the Hydrogen breath test. In this test hydrogen can be detected on the breath 2.5 hours after the ingestion of lactose. Following 2 above, how does the lactose get to the colon and then the hydrogen to the breath in 2.5 hours?
I cannot claim any expertise in this subject, but the article appears contradictory. Perhaps the hydrogen gas is produced in the duodenum? It would certainly fit better with the time scales given for the appearance of symptoms and for the testing methods used. Winstanr ( talk) 11:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)