Nezam El-Tayebat Fact CheckA scientific assessment of the “نظام الطيبات” nutrition system
Choose country
Choose language: English

Mostly false Not supported by high-quality evidence Certainty of evidence: low provisional C-DRY-11

Fresh milk, yogurt (incl. laban rayeb, ayran, labneh) and white/cottage cheese are harmful and must be avoided, whereas aged cheeses (cheddar, mozzarella, romi), processed cheese triangles, cream (qeshta), butter and ghee are allowed.

Safety note: Removing milk, yogurt and white cheese from the diets of children, adolescents, pregnant and breastfeeding women and older adults can lower calcium and protein intake if no adequate substitutes are used (I-DRY-14 notes that complete exclusion of dairy may favour osteopenia/osteoporosis). Medically accepted position: dairy or adequate calcium/vitamin D alternatives are part of a balanced diet; dietary changes in children and pregnancy should be discussed with a physician or dietitian. Randomised trials show that dairy (mostly milk) increases bone mineral accrual in children (I-DRY-103), and current guidelines (US 2025-2030, I-DRY-101; NHS, I-DRY-123) recommend milk, yogurt and cheese or calcium-fortified alternatives for children and during pregnancy. Children who switch to plant drinks need fortified products (I-DRY-104). In pregnancy, NHS advises only pasteurised milk, yogurt and cream and avoiding unpasteurised milk, cream (including raw qeshta), yogurt and butter because of listeria (I-MEAT-07). Cow's milk should not be the main drink for babies under 12 months (I-DRY-123). This is general information, not individual medical advice.
In short: The system's split is not supported by evidence: milk and especially yogurt are not worse than cheese in studies, residues occur in both groups, and removing milk and yogurt from the diets of children or pregnant women without adequate calcium substitutes can be harmful.
Conclusion: The system's split between forbidden fresh dairy and allowed cheese, cream, butter and ghee is not supported by the evidence, except for lower lactose in aged cheese and butter.
  1. Original statement
  2. Scientific assessment
  3. Scientific evidence in detail
  4. In plain language
  5. Studies on this claim
  6. Regional context
  7. What applies in my country?
  8. References

Original statement

الألبان الطازجة والزبادي والجبن الأبيض — تجنّب | الأجبان الناضجة (شيدر، موتزاريلا، رومي) — مسموح | الزبدة والسمن — مسموح

not verbatim – paraphrase. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

Fresh milk, yogurt (incl. laban rayeb, ayran, labneh) and white/cottage cheese are harmful and must be avoided, whereas aged cheeses (cheddar, mozzarella, romi), processed cheese triangles, cream (qeshta), butter and ghee are allowed.

Origin

Source status
Archive food list
Attribution
Archive food list (eltayebat.com/foods; EN: /en/foods/)
Origin
https://eltayebat.com/foods/
Attribution uncertainty
Classification by the archive; no rationale or video reference given on the list page.
Claimed mechanism

Fresh dairy is poorly digested, causes bloating, inflammation and carries hormones/residues; fermented/cooked/fatty dairy is easier to digest.

Claimed health effect

Avoiding fresh dairy prevents digestive problems, inflammation and the diseases listed in the archive rule.

Population concerned

Everyone, including families (sandwiches for children are mentioned in videos).

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Diverging source versions

جبنة مطبوخة (مثلثات)

Source status
Third-party site (unofficial)
Attribution
Third-party site altayybat.com (unofficial)
Origin
https://altayybat.com/ar/
Attribution uncertainty
Unofficial fan/summary site; lowest attribution level; no video references given.

اللبن بكل انواعه والزبادي والكريمة واللبنة ممنوعة — تسبب الانتفاخ

Source status
Third-party site (unofficial)
Attribution
Third-party site mytayibat.com (unofficial)
Origin
https://mytayibat.com/forbidden
Attribution uncertainty
Unofficial site; lowest attribution level.

ما تكلش جبنه الكيري اديني قلت اهو المربعات دي ما تكلهاش دي اكنها جبنه بيضا عادي بس متغلفه

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live!تاني يوم رمضان (Open source)
Published
20 February 2026
Timestamp
0:18:09 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain transcription errors; spoken live-stream language, context partly conversational.

خلوا الجبنه القريش وبلاش الجبنه البروسيس اللي انا بنصح بيها دلوقتي

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
الحلقة الأولي من بودكاست #بدون_إثـــــــارة_جدل مع الدكتور ضياء العوضي (Open source)
Published
22 November 2024
Timestamp
0:05:54 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain transcription errors; spoken live-stream language, context partly conversational.

ما هو الزبده يا باشا من اللحمه ما هو الزبده ده من اللبن واللبن ده من دم البقره والبقره مسمومه

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! الهرم الغذائي الجديده (Open source)
Published
20 January 2026
Timestamp
1:01:12 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain transcription errors; spoken live-stream language, context partly conversational.

طبعا طبعا الجبنه المطبوخه اه سهله الهضم

Of course, of course: processed (cooked) cheese, yes, is easy to digest.

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! اصل الأمراض في فهم الاعراض✌️✌️✌️ (Open source)
Published
5 September 2025
Timestamp
0:37:44 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; YouTube original not checked; wording may contain recognition errors. Processed cheese is not mentioned on the archive food list.

انت بتكتب ا ليه الجبنه القريش مضره باختصار انها لا تهضم

You write: why is cottage cheese harmful? In short, because it is not digested.

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! الكورتيزون حياتك (Open source)
Published
17 October 2025
Timestamp
0:16:35 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; YouTube original not checked; wording may contain recognition errors. Consistent with the archive list (white/cottage cheese: avoid).

Scientific assessment

Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.

Certainty of evidence: low – Further research is likely to change the assessment considerably.

1. What was claimed?

Within dairy, fresh/fermented-fresh products are harmful and must be avoided while aged and processed cheese, cream, butter and ghee are acceptable.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

Aged hard cheese and butter contain very little lactose, so they cause fewer symptoms in lactose malabsorbers (I-DRY-13, I-DRY-14). Reducing very high fresh-milk intake is not harmful for adults who get calcium elsewhere; whole milk was associated with slightly higher type 2 diabetes risk in one analysis (I-DRY-10).

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

(1) Yogurt is among the dairy foods with the most favourable associations: lower type 2 diabetes risk (RR 0.82 per serving/day in the meta-analysis; in the US cohorts yogurt was inverse, HR 0.83 per serving/day and 0.86 after correcting for diet change, whereas cheese, 1.07, and whole milk, 1.10, were slightly positive, attenuating to about 1.03 after that correction; I-DRY-10) and no association with Parkinson's (I-DRY-07) or, in one meta-analysis, acne (I-DRY-08). In the archive's own key study, each serving of fermented milk/yogurt or cheese was associated with 10-15% lower mortality and hip-fracture rates in women, and fermented milk was inversely associated with oxidative-stress and inflammation markers (A-DRY-01). For hip fracture, yogurt (RR 0.75) and cheese (RR 0.68) were both favourable, but each estimate rests on only 3 cohorts (I-DRY-03), so the signal is low-certainty and does not favour cheese over yogurt. (2) Cheese, which is allowed, showed the strongest per-gram association with prostate cancer in the archive's own key meta-analysis (RR 1.09 per 50 g/d, A-DRY-02) and is rich in casein including A1 beta-casein. (3) The hormone and residue argument (C-DRY-01) applies more to fat-rich products: oestrone was highest in butter (1.47 ng/g vs 0.13 ng/mL in milk) and progesterone in butter and cream (I-DRY-17), and fat-soluble contaminants partition into milk fat. (4) The lactose argument does not fit the split either: cooking cream (3.9 g/100 g) and sour cream (3.4 g) contain more lactose than plain yogurt (2.6 g) or Greek yogurt (0.5 g), and most lactose-intolerant people tolerate yogurt with live cultures (I-DRY-14). (5) Sources conflict on cream and on processed cheese squares. Therefore the dividing line is not evidence-based. The umbrella review I-DRY-12 covers milk only and says nothing about yogurt or cheese.

4. What remains unclear?

Whether some followers feel better because of reduced lactose intake (plausible) or because of other changes in the diet.

5. Which studies support it?

I-DRY-13 (low lactose in aged cheese) partially supports the allowed group for lactose-intolerant people.

6. Which studies contradict it?

A-DRY-01 (fermented milk/yogurt and cheese inversely associated with mortality and fractures), I-DRY-10, I-DRY-03, I-DRY-07, I-DRY-08, I-DRY-15 (cheese inversely associated with CVD), A-DRY-02 (cheese and prostate cancer), I-DRY-17 (hormones highest in butter and cream), I-DRY-14 (lactose in cream; yogurt tolerated), I-DRY-12 (fresh-milk component only). New: I-DRY-107 (yogurt 200 g/day associated with 11% lower all-cause mortality), I-DRY-103 (RCTs: dairy increases bone accrual in children), I-DRY-118 (Egyptian Ras and Domiati cheeses carried pesticide and aflatoxin M1 findings comparable to raw milk), I-DRY-101 and I-DRY-123 (current US and UK guidance recommend milk, yogurt and cheese, including in pregnancy and childhood).

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

European dietary guidelines include milk and fermented milk products such as yogurt as part of a healthy diet (not separately fetched here).

8. What is known about Egypt?

Excluding yogurt, laban rayeb and white cheese removes affordable traditional sources of calcium and protein for Egyptian families; aged/imported cheeses are more expensive and saltier (cost/salt not quantified here).

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

The evidence does not support forbidding yogurt and white cheese while allowing cream, butter, ghee and processed cheese. Lactose-intolerant people can choose low-lactose options; others have no evidence-based reason for this split.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

No study compares the system's two dairy groups directly. However, the archive's own key dairy study (A-DRY-01) and independent cohorts and meta-analyses show that the forbidden group (especially yogurt) is not worse - and is often more favourable - than the allowed group, and the mechanisms the archive cites (A1 casein, IGF-1, residues, milk hormones, lactose) apply equally or more to cheese, cream, butter and ghee. Individual yogurt and cheese estimates rest on few studies, so certainty stays low.

Source quality

Archive food list (no rationale given); rationale reconstructed from Elawady transcripts; third-party sites conflict on cream and processed cheese.

Regional transferability

Applies equally to Egypt and Europe; yogurt-type products (laban rayeb, zabadi) are traditional Egyptian foods.

Individual exceptions

Lactose-intolerant people may tolerate aged cheese and butter better than milk; milk-allergic people should avoid all dairy including cheese and cream (butter/ghee contain traces of protein).

Regional scope of the claim
general (biological/medical)
Last reviewed
26 October 2026 provisional

Scientific evidence in detail

Not supported by high-quality evidence – There is no good evidence for the claim; this alone does not prove it wrong.

Research question: Is there evidence that fresh milk, yogurt and white cheese are harmful while aged/processed cheese, cream, butter and ghee are acceptable, and is excluding the former safe for children and pregnant women?

Research question in detail (PICO)
Population
General population, including children and pregnant/breastfeeding women
Intervention or exposure
Excluding milk, yogurt and white cheese; consuming aged/processed cheese, cream, butter, ghee
Comparison
Usual mixed dairy intake as recommended
Geographic scope
universal biology; Egypt-specific food supply
Outcomes
  • Mortality/CVD/T2D by dairy type
  • Bone accrual in children
  • Nutrient adequacy in pregnancy
  • Contaminant exposure by product

Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.

What speaks for the claim?

What speaks against the claim?

What does the overall evidence say?

Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.

Which position is better supported?

The dividing line is not evidence-based: yogurt and milk are at least as favourable as cheese; contamination and hormone concerns apply equally or more to cheese and fat-rich products; excluding milk and yogurt in children and pregnancy risks inadequate calcium unless replaced.

Why some studies weigh more

RCTs in children, large cohorts and current guidelines outweigh mechanistic arguments; lactose data support only a narrow subgroup advantage for aged cheese.

Is a causal relationship established? Not applicable The claim is a classification rule; evidence addresses each food group separately.

Remaining uncertainty

Long-term outcomes of the full Tayebat dairy pattern have not been studied.

Justified conclusion

No evidence supports forbidding milk, yogurt and white cheese; aged cheese is a reasonable option for lactose-intolerant people.

Why do studies seem to disagree?

Cheese evidence (I-DRY-124) supports the allowed side, but yogurt evidence (I-DRY-107) contradicts the forbidden side; both can be true at once, which shows the split is arbitrary rather than that one group is harmful.

Does this depend on the country?
General biological effects
Universal.
Eating habits
Laban rayeb, zabadi and white cheese are traditional affordable foods in Egypt.
Origin of the food
Raw-milk products and unpasteurised cream (qeshta) carry listeria risk in pregnancy (NHS guidance).
Contaminants
Ras cheese and Domiati cheese had pesticide/AFM1 findings (I-DRY-118).
National production conditions
Traditional cheeses are often made from raw milk (I-DRY-118 conclusion).
Legal rules
Egyptian standards cited in I-DRY-118 (not fetched).
Actual monitoring data
No national monitoring data found.

A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.

Statistical re-check
  • CI log-symmetry yogurt estimate – Symmetric. recalculated
  • AFM1 exceedance shares – Raw milk 7/100; Ras cheese 1/34. recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
Main outcome
Health outcomes of yogurt/milk v aged cheese
Starting level
low (observational studies)
Reasons for downgrading
  • indirectness (no direct comparison of the two groups)
Result
low

Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.

Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
  • USDA/HHS: Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025-2030 (2026) · Original publication
    Dairy 3 servings/day (full-fat, no added sugar); full-fat dairy important for children; calcium-rich dairy in pregnancy; olive oil prioritised for cooking, butter or beef tallow as other options; saturated fat should not exceed 10% of daily calories (I-DRY-101).
  • NHS (England): Dairy and alternatives in your diet (2026) · Original publication
    Milk, cheese and yoghurt are good sources of protein and calcium; calcium is important in pregnancy for the baby's bones; dairy important for children under 5; cow's milk not suitable as main drink under 1 year; fortified plant alternatives acceptable (I-DRY-123).
  • NHS (England): Have a healthy diet in pregnancy (2026) · Original publication
    Dairy foods such as milk, cheese, fromage frais and yoghurt are important in pregnancy because they contain calcium and other nutrients; unsweetened calcium-fortified alternatives if preferred.
  • NHS (England): Foods to avoid in pregnancy (2026) · Original publication
    Pasteurised milk, butter, yoghurt, cream and hard cheeses are safe; avoid unpasteurised milk, cream, yoghurt, butter and ice cream (listeria risk); mould-ripened and soft blue cheeses only if thoroughly cooked (page also registered as I-MEAT-07).
  • WHO: WHO recommendation: Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for prevention of pre-eclampsia and its complications (2018) · Original publication could not be retrieved; content not used
  • EFSA: Scientific Opinion on Dietary Reference Values for calcium (2015) · Original publication could not be retrieved; content not used
Search strategy

Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).

DatabaseDateSearchLooking forHitsIncluded
Europe PMC26 October 2026(dairy OR milk) AND (children OR adolescents) AND ("bone mineral" OR fracture) AND (PUB_TYPE:"Meta-Analysis" OR PUB_TYPE:"Systematic Review")contradicting evidence378
Europe PMC26 October 2026("milk avoidance" OR "dairy avoidance" OR "dairy elimination" OR "cow milk elimination") AND children AND (bone OR calcium OR growth OR fracture)both directions221
Europe PMC26 October 2026"calcium supplementation" AND pregnancy AND (pre-eclampsia OR preeclampsia) AND PUB_TYPE:"Review" AND JOURNAL:"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"both directions43
Europe PMC26 October 2026(dairy OR milk) AND (children OR adolescents) AND ("bone mineral" OR "bone mass") AND ("randomized" OR "randomised") AND ("meta-analysis")contradicting evidence1723
PubMed26 October 2026(dairy[tiab] OR milk[tiab]) AND (child*[tiab] OR adolescen*[tiab]) AND bone[tiab] AND (meta-analysis[pt] OR systematic review[pt])contradicting evidence23
Europe PMC26 October 2026(dairy OR milk OR yogurt OR cheese) AND (mortality OR "cardiovascular disease" OR "type 2 diabetes") AND ("umbrella review" OR "meta-analysis") AND PUB_YEAR:[2023 TO 2026]both directions14249
Europe PMC26 October 2026(yogurt OR yoghurt OR "fermented milk") AND (harm OR adverse OR "increased risk") AND (cohort OR meta-analysis) AND (mortality OR cancer OR diabetes)supporting evidence7780
PubMed26 October 2026cheese[ti] AND (mortality[tiab] OR cardiovascular[tiab] OR diabetes[tiab]) AND (meta-analysis[pt]) AND 2017:2026[dp]both directions4
Europe PMC26 October 2026(milk) AND (antibiotic residues OR "antibiotic residue" OR "veterinary drug residues" OR "pesticide residues" OR organochlorine) AND (Egypt OR Egyptian)supporting evidence4121

Open questions

Nutritional status of children and pregnant women following the system; calcium intake data.

How deeply was this checked?

17 linked studies: 11 checked in full text (7 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 6 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.

Last scientific review: 26 October 2026

History of the verdict
  1. 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly false (low)
  2. 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly false (low)
    New guideline, RCT and cohort evidence strengthens the conclusion; certainty stays low because no study compares the two dairy groups directly. The safety note is sharpened (children, pregnancy, unpasteurised products).
    New sources: I-DRY-101 I-DRY-103 I-DRY-107 I-DRY-118 I-DRY-123 I-DRY-124

In plain language

The system forbids milk, yogurt and white cheese but allows aged cheese, processed cheese, cream, butter and ghee. Research does not support this line. Yogurt is one of the dairy foods most often linked to better health, for example a lower risk of type 2 diabetes. Even the archive's own main milk study found that women who ate more yogurt or cheese died less often and had fewer hip fractures. Cheese, which is allowed, was linked to prostate cancer at least as strongly as milk. Natural hormones are found in higher amounts in butter and cream, and cooking cream contains more milk sugar than yogurt. The only solid point is that aged cheese and butter contain little lactose, which helps people who cannot digest lactose.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (1)

  • Many aged Italian cheeses contain almost no lactose

    Facioni MS et al.. Foods 2021 · PMID 34574346 · DOI 10.3390/foods10092236
    Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment

    All but one of 25 PDO cheeses (even some aged only 20-35 days) had lactose below 10 mg/kg; fresh mozzarella had about 3,500 mg/kg.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Measure lactose in cheeses.

    How was the study done?

    Lab analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    25 cheeses.

    What was actually found?

    Lactose below 10 mg/kg in nearly all tested ripened cheeses; starter cultures, not just ageing time, drive lactose loss.

    How large was the observed effect?

    <10 mg/kg.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Aged cheese suits lactose-intolerant people.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Italian/European PDO cheeses only; few samples; no fresh, processed or Egyptian cheeses; funded by a lactose-free certification company.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports the digestibility point for lactose.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High (Italy).

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Anything about allergy, inflammation or other diseases; lactose content of processed cheese triangles, cream or romi.

    Scientific details →

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (14)

  • Yogurt linked to lower diabetes risk

    Chen M et al.. BMC Med 2014 · PMID 25420418 · DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0215-1
    Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Each daily serving of yogurt: about 18% lower risk of type 2 diabetes in the meta-analysis.

    Yogurt RR 0.82 per serving/day for type 2 diabetes.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Dairy types and diabetes.

    How was the study done?

    Three cohorts + meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    459,790 people in meta-analysis.

    What was actually found?

    Yogurt inversely associated with diabetes; total, low-fat and high-fat dairy neutral; small positive associations for cheese and whole milk disappeared in a sensitivity analysis.

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 0.82 (0.70-0.96).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Yogurt is not harmful and may be beneficial.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational; mostly white US health professionals; self-reported diet; yogurt eaters may live healthier.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts banning yogurt.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate-high.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation.

    Scientific details →

  • Hip fractures: milk neutral, yogurt and cheese linked to fewer fractures

    Bian S et al.. BMC Public Health 2018 · PMID 29357845 · DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5041-5
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Yogurt RR 0.75 and cheese RR 0.68 in 3 cohort studies each; milk RR 0.91 (not significant), though the cohort dose curve rose up to about 600 g/day.

    Yogurt (forbidden) RR 0.75 for hip fracture.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Dairy and hip fracture.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis of 18 studies.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Adults.

    What was actually found?

    Milk overall null (cohorts) with a rising nonlinear dose curve; yogurt and cheese linked to fewer fractures in few studies.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Yogurt RR 0.75 (0.66-0.86).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Milk does not seem to increase fractures.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational; high heterogeneity for milk; only 3 cohorts for yogurt and cheese; case-control recall bias.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Does not support a clear milk-fracture harm, but does not fully exclude a modest increase at high intake; contradicts banning yogurt on bone grounds.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Includes Europe.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation.

    Scientific details →

  • Milk linked to slightly more Parkinson's, yogurt not

    Jiang W et al.. Eur J Epidemiol 2014 · PMID 24894826 · DOI 10.1007/s10654-014-9921-4
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Absolute risk: 2-4 extra cases per 100,000 person-years per 200 g milk a day.

    Yogurt RR 0.95 (NS) for PD.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Dairy and PD.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    304,193 people.

    What was actually found?

    Milk associated; yogurt not.

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 1.17 per 200 g/d milk.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Tiny absolute risk.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Few studies.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports weak link.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation.

    Scientific details →

  • Meta-analysis: milk linked to acne, yogurt and cheese not

    Aghasi M et al.. Clin Nutr 2019 · PMID 29778512 · DOI 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.04.015
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Total milk OR 1.48.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Dairy and acne.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Observational studies.

    What was actually found?

    Milk associated with acne.

    How large was the observed effect?

    OR 1.48 (1.31-1.66).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Possible link.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports association.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation.

    Scientific details →

  • Overview of 41 reviews: milk more often linked to benefit than harm

    Zhang X et al.. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2021 · PMID 33413488 · DOI 10.1186/s12986-020-00527-y
    Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Milk was linked more often to benefits (heart, stroke, bowel cancer, diabetes, bones) than to harms (prostate cancer, Parkinson's, acne); most evidence was rated low certainty.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Summarise milk and health.

    How was the study done?

    Umbrella review.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    41 meta-analyses.

    What was actually found?

    Mostly beneficial associations; harmful associations for prostate cancer, Parkinson's, acne, infant iron deficiency and, per extra 200 g/day, hip fracture.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Not pooled.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Milk is not shown to be generally harmful.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Umbrella review without protocol; mostly observational, low/very-low certainty; overlap not handled; milk only (no yogurt/cheese).

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts blanket harm claims; confirms specific signals.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation; that milk is harmless for everyone; anything specific about yogurt or cheese.

    Scientific details →

  • Cheese eaters had slightly fewer heart attacks and strokes

    Chen GC et al.. Eur J Nutr 2017 · PMID 27517544 · DOI 10.1007/s00394-016-1292-z
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    High vs low cheese: CVD RR 0.90.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Cheese and CVD.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    15 studies.

    What was actually found?

    Inverse association.

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 0.90 (0.82-0.99).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Cheese not linked to heart harm.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Neutral to the system's split.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation.

    Scientific details →

  • Large review links more dairy with slightly more prostate cancer

    Aune D et al.. Am J Clin Nutr 2015 · PMID 25527754 · DOI 10.3945/ajcn.113.067157
    Meta-analysiscited by the Tayebat archiveabstract checked★ key study

    About 7% higher risk per 400 g dairy a day and 9% per 50 g cheese a day.

    Cheese (allowed in the system) had RR 1.09 per 50 g/d.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Summarise cohort studies on dairy and prostate cancer.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis of 32 prospective studies.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Men in many countries.

    What was actually found?

    Small increases with dairy, milk, low-fat milk and cheese.

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 1.07 per 400 g/d total dairy; 1.09 per 50 g/d cheese.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    A small relative risk increase; absolute risk not reported.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational; screening bias possible.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports a modest association; cheese not safer than milk.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Includes European data.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Causation; that cheese is safer than milk.

    Scientific details →

  • Swedish study: very high milk intake linked to earlier death in women

    Michaëlsson K et al.. BMJ 2014 · PMID 25352269 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.g6015
    Cohort studycited by the Tayebat archivefull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Women drinking 3 or more glasses a day had a 1.93-fold mortality hazard compared with less than 1 glass (17.7 vs 10.7 deaths per 1,000 person-years); no fewer hip fractures. Yogurt/fermented milk and cheese showed the opposite: lower mortality.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Check whether high milk intake is linked with death and fractures.

    How was the study done?

    Two large cohorts followed for 11-20 years using diet questionnaires.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    61,433 women and 45,339 men in Sweden.

    What was actually found?

    More milk was linked with higher mortality, especially in women, and not with fewer fractures; yogurt/soured milk and cheese were linked with lower mortality and fewer hip fractures in women.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Women HR 1.93 (1.80-2.06) for >=3 vs <1 glass/day (absolute 17.7 vs 10.7 per 1,000 person-years); per glass HR 1.15 women, 1.03 men.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    A warning signal for very high milk intake, not proof of harm.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational; confounding and reverse causation possible; female estimates stronger partly due to repeated measurement; biomarker data cross-sectional; authors ask for caution.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports the archive figures but not a causal claim.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    European data; intakes higher than average.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    That milk causes death or fractures; that yogurt or other fermented dairy is harmful (the study suggests the opposite).

    Scientific details →

  • Review: milk naturally contains hormones

    Malekinejad H et al.. Iran J Public Health 2015 · PMID 26258087
    Narrative reviewindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment

    Milk contains small amounts of hormones (more in butter and cream than in milk); the authors raise a cancer concern but provide no new human outcome data.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: very low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Hormones in dairy.

    How was the study done?

    Narrative review.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    n/a

    What was actually found?

    Hormones present at ng/mL levels or below; highest oestrone and progesterone levels in butter and cream; several hormones poorly absorbed or rapidly degraded.

    How large was the observed effect?

    n/a

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Presence is not proof of harm.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Narrative.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Weak support.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Harm at usual intake; that butter, cream or ghee are lower in hormones than milk (the data suggest the opposite for fat-soluble steroids).

    Scientific details →

  • New US dietary guidelines (2026) recommend dairy and olive oil, allow butter in limits

    U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Federal dietary guideline (PDF, realfood.gov; linked from dietaryguidelines.gov) 2026
    Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study

    Three servings of dairy a day, including milk and yogurt, for children and adults; olive oil first, butter as an option, saturated fat at most 10% of calories.

    Recommends milk, yogurt and cheese alike; full-fat yogurt for infants.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Give official food advice for the US population.

    How was the study done?

    Government guideline document.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Whole population.

    What was actually found?

    Dairy recommended at all ages; saturated fat limit kept; olive oil prioritised.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Not applicable.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Milk, yogurt and cheese are all recommended; butter is allowed but not preferred.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Policy document; evidence review not read; contested changes.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts banning milk and yogurt; does not support unlimited ghee or butter.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    US; similar dairy advice exists in the UK (NHS).

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show health effects by itself.

    Scientific details →

  • Extra dairy helps children build bone

    Hidayat K et al.. Adv Nutr 2023 · PMID 37414219 · DOI 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.06.010
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study

    In 21 trials, children given extra dairy gained about 2-4% more bone mineral and grew slightly taller.

    Excluding milk/yogurt in children removes a proven contributor to bone accrual.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Test whether extra dairy improves children's bones.

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis of randomised trials.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    21 trials, children 3-18 years.

    What was actually found?

    More bone mineral (about 2-4%), slightly more height, higher IGF-I.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Whole-body BMC +25 g (+3%).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Milk and other dairy help growing bones; removing them needs a calcium plan.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Bone density is a surrogate; some authors work for a dairy company.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts the idea that milk is harmful for children; confirms that dairy raises IGF-I.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applies everywhere.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show fewer fractures later in life.

    Scientific details →

  • Yogurt linked to lower mortality; total dairy best at moderate amounts

    Hu X et al.. Front Nutr 2026 · PMID 41660415 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2026.1731841
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    200 g yogurt/day: 11% lower all-cause mortality; total dairy U-shaped (optimum ~250-300 g/day).

    Yogurt most favourably associated with mortality.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Find how much and which dairy relates to mortality.

    How was the study done?

    Dose-response meta-analysis.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    29 cohorts, 1.68 million people.

    What was actually found?

    Yogurt and to a lesser extent cheese and milk linked to lower mortality; very high totals not.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Yogurt HR 0.89 per 200 g/day.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Moderate dairy, especially yogurt, looks fine or beneficial.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational; overlapping data.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts forbidding yogurt; partly supports caution about very high intakes.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot prove cause and effect.

    Scientific details →

  • Egyptian milk and cheese contain some residues, mostly below limits

    Ibrahim AA et al.. Open Vet J 2024 · PMID 38549581 · DOI 10.5455/OVJ.2024.v14.i2.4
    Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study

    No raw milk sample exceeded pesticide limits; 7% exceeded the aflatoxin M1 limit; some Ras and Domiati cheeses exceeded pesticide limits.

    Allowed Ras cheese had pesticide/AFM1 findings comparable to or above raw milk.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Measure contaminants in Egyptian milk and cheese.

    How was the study done?

    Laboratory survey.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    100 milk and 100 cheese samples.

    What was actually found?

    Residues common at low levels; few exceedances, also in cheese.

    How large was the observed effect?

    AFM1 >limit 7% (milk), 2.9% (Ras).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Contamination is a food-control issue for all dairy, not only fresh milk.

    What are the study's limitations?

    One season; inconsistent metal data.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Partly supports residue concern; contradicts milk-only ban.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Egypt-specific.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show health harm.

    Scientific details →

  • NHS: dairy or fortified alternatives are important in pregnancy and childhood

    NHS (England). NHS website 2026
    Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkfull text checked

    Milk, cheese and yogurt provide calcium needed for the baby's bones; pasteurised products only in pregnancy.

    Milk and yogurt recommended in pregnancy and childhood.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Give official dairy advice.

    How was the study done?

    Guidance page.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Public.

    What was actually found?

    Dairy recommended, incl. pregnancy and children.

    How large was the observed effect?

    n/a

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Do not drop dairy without a calcium-rich alternative.

    What are the study's limitations?

    No evidence review shown.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts forbidding milk and yogurt.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    UK.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    n/a

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (2)

  • Lactose intolerance is common and managed by reducing lactose

    Facioni MS et al.. J Transl Med 2020 · PMID 32590986 · DOI 10.1186/s12967-020-02429-2
    Narrative reviewindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment

    Most adults worldwide produce less lactase, but most lactose-intolerant people tolerate small amounts of lactose and usually yogurt; avoiding all dairy may harm bones.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Diet in lactose intolerance.

    How was the study done?

    Narrative review.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    n/a

    What was actually found?

    Reduce lactose individually; yogurt is usually tolerated; aged hard cheeses are near lactose-free while cream and fresh cheeses contain more lactose; avoid unnecessary total exclusion.

    How large was the observed effect?

    70% limited lactase (stated).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Individual tolerance matters.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Narrative; COI.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports individual, not general, avoidance.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    General harm of dairy; that yogurt is less tolerable than aged cheese or cream.

    Scientific details →

  • Cheese is linked to neutral or slightly better health outcomes

    Zhang M et al.. Adv Nutr 2023 · PMID 37328108 · DOI 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.06.007
    Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    About 5-8% lower mortality and CVD in high cheese eaters.

    Allowed cheese not harmful; but yogurt equally or more favourable.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Summarise cheese and health.

    How was the study done?

    Umbrella review.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Many cohorts.

    What was actually found?

    Neutral to modest benefits.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Mortality RR 0.95.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Moderate cheese is fine.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports allowing cheese, not banning yogurt.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot prove benefit.

    Scientific details →

Regional context

Germany / EU

European dietary guidelines include milk and fermented milk products such as yogurt as part of a healthy diet (not separately fetched here).

Egypt

Excluding yogurt, laban rayeb and white cheese removes affordable traditional sources of calcium and protein for Egyptian families; aged/imported cheeses are more expensive and saltier (cost/salt not quantified here).

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly false The system's split between forbidden fresh dairy and allowed cheese, cream, butter and ghee is not supported by the evidence, except for lower lactose in aged cheese and butter.

The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:

  • Veterinary medicines and antibiotics
  • Hormonal growth promoters
  • Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)
  • Mycotoxins (mould toxins)
  • Controls, imports, recalls, labelling

Dairy

Choose a country to see the checked information for it.

Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.

Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country

References

  1. Lactose Residual Content in PDO Cheeses: Novel Inclusions for Consumers with Lactose Intolerance.. Facioni MS et al.. Foods 2021 · PMID 34574346 · DOI 10.3390/foods10092236
  2. Dairy consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis.. Chen M et al.. BMC Med 2014 · PMID 25420418 · DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0215-1
  3. Dairy product consumption and risk of hip fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Bian S et al.. BMC Public Health 2018 · PMID 29357845 · DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5041-5
  4. Dairy foods intake and risk of Parkinson's disease: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.. Jiang W et al.. Eur J Epidemiol 2014 · PMID 24894826 · DOI 10.1007/s10654-014-9921-4
  5. Dairy intake and acne development: A meta-analysis of observational studies.. Aghasi M et al.. Clin Nutr 2019 · PMID 29778512 · DOI 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.04.015
  6. Milk consumption and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in humans.. Zhang X et al.. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2021 · PMID 33413488 · DOI 10.1186/s12986-020-00527-y
  7. Cheese consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis of prospective studies.. Chen GC et al.. Eur J Nutr 2017 · PMID 27517544 · DOI 10.1007/s00394-016-1292-z
  8. Dairy products, calcium, and prostate cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.. Aune D et al.. Am J Clin Nutr 2015 · PMID 25527754 · DOI 10.3945/ajcn.113.067157
  9. Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men: cohort studies.. Michaëlsson K et al.. BMJ 2014 · PMID 25352269 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.g6015
  10. Hormones in Dairy Foods and Their Impact on Public Health - A Narrative Review Article.. Malekinejad H et al.. Iran J Public Health 2015 · PMID 26258087
  11. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025-2030. U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Federal dietary guideline (PDF, realfood.gov; linked from dietaryguidelines.gov) 2026
  12. The Effects of Dairy Product Supplementation on Bone Health Indices in Children Aged 3 to 18 Years: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.. Hidayat K et al.. Adv Nutr 2023 · PMID 37414219 · DOI 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.06.010
  13. The dose-response relationship between dairy product intake and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.. Hu X et al.. Front Nutr 2026 · PMID 41660415 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2026.1731841
  14. Assessment of some chemical residues in Egyptian raw milk and traditional cheese.. Ibrahim AA et al.. Open Vet J 2024 · PMID 38549581 · DOI 10.5455/OVJ.2024.v14.i2.4
  15. Dairy and alternatives in your diet (NHS). NHS (England). NHS website 2026
  16. Nutritional management of lactose intolerance: the importance of diet and food labelling.. Facioni MS et al.. J Transl Med 2020 · PMID 32590986 · DOI 10.1186/s12967-020-02429-2
  17. Cheese consumption and multiple health outcomes: an umbrella review and updated meta-analysis of prospective studies.. Zhang M et al.. Adv Nutr 2023 · PMID 37328108 · DOI 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.06.007

← Back to overview