The A2 question again

A colourful and controversial chapter in the A2 milk story has been brought to a close with the publication last week of the much-awaited European Food Safety Authority's (EFSA) report into the "devil" in our milk, a chapter that began with the publication of Lincoln University academic Keith Woodford's book of the same name in September 2007, The Press says in an editorial.  Scientists working for the EFSA reviewed dozens of international research papers to establish if, as some believed, there was a clear cause-and-effect link between the "devil" -- a tiny protein fragment from beta-casein in A1 milk -- and illnesses such as heart disease, type-one diabetes, Crohn's disease, autism and schizophrenia. They concluded that existing work showed there was no such relationship and that a formal risk assessment by the authority of any threat posed by the protein was unnecessary. A2 milk, which does not contain the protein, naturally occurs in herds throughout southern Europe, Asia and Africa, and has experienced a flush of popularity in NZ and Australia since Woodford's book hit the shelves. The A2 saga on both sides of the Tasman remains one of claim and counterclaim, selective science, public relations spin, corporate games, poorly concealed agendas, limited supply and high expense. The stakes are high because milk is a vital part of a healthy diet and also because dairy products are NZ's largest single export commodity. While the broad findings of the European review will be welcomed by dairy giant Fonterra and traditional dairy interests, they will be a blow to the determined and passionate A2 lobby. They will also come as something of a relief to the New Zealand Food Safety Authority, (NZFSA), whose earlier involvement in the debate was highly questionable, as was the way it handled the issue publicly.