ATM - A2 Milk Corporation Limited

[see weed]

I haven't found A2 milk at local countdown today, will try tomorrow.

Plenty at Sylvia Park and Onehunga. I always phone first to check if there is any in stock.

[Master98]

Plenty at Sylvia Park and Onehunga. I always phone first to check if there is any in stock.

cheers, will try tomorrow.

[zigzag]

I haven't found A2 milk at local countdown today, will try tomorrow.

I get mine from Countdown in Grey Lynn. Supply can be a bit erratic, but they usually have some.

[zigzag]

Take advantage of low sp and buy some more.

Yeah see weed. Sounds like a plan.

[NT001]

Here We Go:

A2 strengthens health claims with first human study

http://www.smh.com.au/business/a2-st...10-102h2w.html

Good on you for posting that, M98. I think we are witnessing a real turning point. The so-called experts who have been saying there's "no scientific proof" about the advantages of A2 will now have to come up with scientific facts to try and disprove the Curtin results - and they won't be able to. And obviously there's more to come including the full report on the Curtin research, plus a growing body of international research that absolutely correlates with this.

It now looks like the nutritionists who understand this issue (as opposed to those who don't) are willing to come out in a much more forthright manner on ATM's side. I think the enemy is on the run. Possibly ATM's lawyers are also finally getting into the act behind the scenes. It was great to see the extraordinary backdown a few days ago by the PR agency for A2's Australian rival Lion-Pura:

A public relations firm engaged by Lion was forced to back down from a claim in an email, seen by Fairfax Media, to nutritionists, saying that its new test meant that people “can enjoy A2 milk at an everyday price”.After attracting the attention of a prominent nutritionist, the PR firm, F4 Consulting, said it was "not authorised to make that claim".
“As will no doubt be clear to you, Pura milk does not only contain A2 protein and does not claim to be the same as milk products that contain only A2 protein,” F4 Consulting wrote.

What we're now seeing is a public re-defining of the A1-A2 issue. It's not just that A2 is good, the claim that has been widely dismissed as dubious marketing hype. It's that A1 is bad, at least for some consumers. It's a delicious irony that ATM's Australian rivals have made A1/A2 a big public issue just at the very moment when the Curtin team was coming out with decisive research results involving human subjects. Love it!

[MAC]

Being published by a European journal too must always be satisfying for the good folk at ATM.

With all the recent debate and media attention Lion have kicked up, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a wee boost in market share in Australia from it, shouldn’t expect to see it up to 30th June reporting of course but perhaps at HY15, let’s see.

[see weed]

I feel like an A2 coming on, looks like A2 on porridge tomorrow. May even take out that 16,000 at 64c, if nobody else wants it.

[NT001]

Being published by a European journal too must always be satisfying for the good folk at ATM.

You're so right, MAC, and therein lies another nice irony. The same journal was the vehicle used some years ago by Professor Stewart Truswell of Sydney University in a rare attempt to discredit the A2 hypothesis with scientific argument. Truswell is about the only scientific authority of any note to have tried to do this, but it needs to be borne in mind that he had been a hired consultant for the NZ Dairy Board in litigation against A2 Corporation. Truswell's article in the journal was absolutely riddled with factual errors and inconsistencies, which were duly exposed in letters of reply. So it's a nice touch that the coup de grace to some of his arguments is now being delivered in the same journal.

[NT001]

SP up only 1c to 65c so far, on very moderate trading. NZ media evidently haven't picked up the story about the Curtin research even though it ran in the Sydney Morning Herald, owned by Fairfax which also owns several NZ papers including the Dom Post. Maybe the Christchurch Press will get on to it - their science man has written well-informed stories about the A1-A2 debate in the past, and Prof Woodford is Christchurch based.

It'll be interesting to see the reaction (if any) from the mainstream dairy sector. Fonterra pretty much has a policy of not commenting on the A2 scientific evidence because it knows which way the research is pointing and just wants to keep quiet about it. I guess the critics might try to discredit the research by pointing out it was funded by ATM. Well so what? It's the results that count. If Fonterra felt it was advantageous to fund research on the issue, it would do the same. The critics can hardly question the findings, except by innuendo. Maybe by saying: "This is no big deal. A small sample of subjects, and a few of them got a bit of a tummy problem, so what? No one died." As others onthis thread have noted, the game is far from over, and entrenched interests won't just lie down. But this is an important development, and a far better result than the possible alternative outcome, that no real clinical difference was found/experienced between those who drank A1 and those who drank A2.

[NT001]

Here's another report from the Australian media - from ABC which has good credibility, and it has some interesting additional detail.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-1...search/5658502

Sorry if I appear to be hogging this thread at the moment - where's everyone else disappeared to?