Ne, tio ne estas ĝusta konkludo, sed la jena estas ĝusta: - "Lakto helpas kontraŭ ĉio malbona." - "Lakto ne helpas kontraŭ netolerado de laktozo." Konklude, - "Netolerado de laktozo ne estas malbona."
Mi ankaŭ ne ŝatas ĉi tiun konkludon, sed ĝi sekvas el la hipotezoj... Logiko ne zorgas pri ĉu ni ŝatas la konkludon aŭ ne... =)
Could very well be a Hinduist saying, since in Hinduism anything coming from a cow (milk, blood, dung…) is the ultimate purifier.
We shouldn't spread false information: "A large observational cohort study in Sweden found that women consuming more than 3 glasses of milk a day had almost twice the mortality over 20 years compared to those women consuming less than one glass a day. In addition, the high milk-drinkers did not have improved bone health. In fact, they had more fractures, particularly hip fractures."
That is what I think I stated in the final clause. I appreciate the aim and purpose but in this case the execution I think is poor. Otherwise, I hope, like me, you too are enjoying this opportunity to learn this ambitious language. I loved discovering the Esperanto word for rainbow.
Luckily there is research saying that grains are healthy for us, and that on average vegans (even ones who eat grains) live longer, so grains are definitely okay.
Additionally, just because something is natural, doesn't make it good, and just because something is unnatural, doesn't make it bad. Two examples are that modern medicine is unnatural, yet we live longer because of it and the other is that lead is natural, but it's quite harmful to most life.
Instead of going off what is natural/unnatural, we should examine the large body of research that exists to determine what is healthy and what is not.