Mark Bittman adds Part 2 to his NYTimes opinionator complaint about milk
Plainly he wasn't just inflating his own personal experience of milk, given the feedback. Unlike the original article, Bittman makes it explicit this time that individual reactions to milk will vary, and he is not recommending that everybody stop drinking milk:
I admire Bittman for using his position at the Times to expose unhealthy practices in the agriculture industry. Anybody who does that is bound to get raked over the coals by some, and bound to sometimes get things wrong. But the larger fight he is fighting is correct, and more power to him. (I am a happy milk drinker.)
In case you missed the first Chowhound thread on Bittman's & Milk, you can find it here:
After being lambasted by so many for his column, and looking again at what he originally wrote, Bittman had to say something, and he had to say something more reasonable. But I still say his original column was an unconsidered one-size-fits-all tirade motivated by his atypical personal experience. It would have been better if he had thought it through back then rather than three weeks later.
re: John Francis
It doesn't seem he was lambasted much at all. The article is basically an accumulation of anecdotal reports from readers with similar experiences. As he writes:
"I don’t want to give the impression that the response was uniform. Though it was overwhelmingly in tune with my own experience, there are people who insist that the symptoms don’t come from all milk . . . ."