Talk:Homogenization

Food Technology

"This is accomplished by forcing the milk at high pressure through small orifices." don't you think we can find a better term than orifices

milk being shot out of orifices, thats some bad imagery —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.174.92 (talk) 22:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Changed it. _Anonabyss ^{[ Talk ][ Contribs ]}  04:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Cell Biology

"Homogenisation is a process perfomed prior to differential centrifugation"--to what end? Could someone provide some context for the "Cell Biology" section of this article?

Cells

The article says that homogenization"involves breaking apart cells." It later says that "Most cells are not damaged by this process." What gives?

Human society

The article lacks a description of the effects and means of homogenization in human society. (the means by which even those who appear to be attempting to fight the system are actually supporting it by being part of the system.) Crimsone 14:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Homogenized milk health risks

Homogenized Milk and Heart Disease: Heart disease is now well established as the leading cause of death in American males. Yet, less that fifty years ago it was a rare disease that didn’t rate among the six leading causes of death in this country. Numerous causes have been suggested by the medical profession, including cigarettes, stress, and a sedentary existence, and now cholesterol and saturated fats.

The information presented here is the product of over thirty years of investigative work by Dr. Kurt A Oster, MD, motivated by two of his own heart attacks. Dr Oster is the Chief of Cardiology, Emeritus at Bridgeport Connecticut’s City Park Hospital. His findings are supported by Dr R. Lincoln and Dr Donald Ross, among many others.

Cholesterol Is Not A Problem: Cholesterol is manufactured by the body. It is so vital that all tissues fabricate it and all cells contain it. The fragmented logic, which gave birth to the hypothesis that cholesterol may be the causative agent of heart disease, is beginning to fall apart under the weight of recent evidence, including that of the National Research Council. In short, because cholesterol is so important physiologically, it is a rather foolhardy assumption that the human system has become dependent on the biochemical that can trigger its self-destruction. There are many people in many countries in the world who consume more cholesterol consumption that we do, but suffer far less heart disease. Fat and cholesterol consumption has not changed significantly in this country in the last 150 years, and yet heart disease skyrocketed fifty years ago.

The Real Culprit: Cows milk is usually nutritious. However, when it is tampered with by way of homogenisation, it becomes a type of slow poison for the circulatory system. Homogenization was introduced into this country in 1932. It is a process that breaks down the fat into very small blobules to keep the fat from separating. The primary purpose is to extend the shelf life of the product.

Milk fat contains a substance called Xanthine Oxidase (XO). This XO is usually not a problem in our system, but homogenization causes some of this XO to pass through the wall of the intestine into the circulatory system. There it creates havoc by attacking specific targets in the artery walls as well as heart tissue, causing lesions. The body responds to this attack by attempting to heal the damaged areas. Fatty tissue and cholesterol are laid over the “body bandaids” that build up over the damaged areas and eventually cause obstruction.

If this hypothesis is correct then the heart disease rate should be highest in the countries with the largest consumption of homogenized milk containing this active XO ingredient. Statistics from around the world confirm that this is exactly the case. Finland is the only country in the world that consumes more homogenized milk than the United States. It is interesting to note that exercise has little effect on the problem because the Finns are very active people.

A heart attack is the product of years of arterial damage, not the result of some sudden overnight occurrence. Considerable arterial damage occurs before the age of fifteen when the greatest volume of milk is consumed. Scarred arteries have been found in infants after autopsy. Studies have revealed that one half of the American children have lesions by the age of ten. The evidence also suggests that it is unwise for pregnant women to drink homogenized milk because of the potential damage to the unborn foetus.

Homogenized milk is a denatural product; is not natural. Egg cholesterol, and fats, do not trigger heart disease. Heart attack was rare before they began to homogenize milk in 1932. Now even young people are dying from it.

Studies of soldiers killed in Korea showed Americans had heart disease at age 22, Japanese and Koreans did not. The difference? Only the Americans drank homogenized milk.

The enzyme XO smuggled into the bloodstream by homogenized milk causes half of all heart attacks. 30% of the heart muscle and artery walls are composed of plasma-logen. This is usually not in the liver or small intestine for good reason. XO serves a useful purpose in the liver and, the small intestine, but destroys plasmalogen if it is present; they cannot co-exist. Plasmalogen is missing from heart muscle of the heart attack victim, but XO from cow’s milk will be found at the site.

XO in regular milk is digested, but in homogenized milk is transported intact directly into the blood stream where it attacks arteries. When XO attacks the artery, an area is literally eaten away. The body, in its wisdom, tries to heal this area with 15 different substances, including cholesterol. As this buildup continues, the risk of heart attack is increased.

Homogenized Milk May Cause Your Heart Attack: The XO Factor, Kurt A. Oster, M.D.

Don't Drink Your Milk!, Frank A. Oski, M.D.

Milk: The Deadly Poison, Robert Cohen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.28.175.4 (talk) 02:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Article Disintegration

It's been tagged for such, but it appears as if there is no support for it in this discussion page. I completely disagree with it, as the article is completely appropriate currently, there is no need to confuse the organization further and create a bunch of little stubs. When you only have one paragraph for each idea it is best to keep it all together especially if it fits the topic completely fine. Does anyone disagree? _Anonabyss ^{[ Talk ][ Contribs ]}  04:41, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

The article is fine currently, but homogenization for each of the disciplines mentioned in the lead is absolutely a big enough subject to warrant their own articles, although the content is not there yet (the mathematical version is not covered at all). If a split could encourage the separated articles to enlarge, it would be a wise move. --Berland (talk) 14:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)