Raw milk recalled after children take ill

[alp227]

Source: SF Chronicle

Raw milk produced by a Fresno dairy is being recalled after five California children, including two siblings in Contra Costa County, became ill from a bacteria believed to have been found in the milk.

The children were sickened by the same strain of E. coli, according to state public health epidemiologists. While investigators have not been able to find that strain in the milk itself, all five children had recently consumed raw milk from the same dairy, Organic Pastures.

The state public health and food and agriculture departments issued the recall notice Tuesday. It affects all Organic Pastures raw dairy products except for cheeses aged for at least 60 days. The dairy is not allowed to sell raw milk until an investigation of its operations is complete.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/16/BA9E1M07Q7.DTL

[Lionessa]

1. I have no problem with people buying raw milk worrying about what

goes on with mass processed milk. But I like raw oats and raw potatoes too, but I cook them before I eat them. I would buy raw milk and pasteurize it myself. It's a really easy process and though I might be foolish enough to risk truly raw milk for myself, I wouldn't for my children, unless it was my cow and I knew and was in control of it's health and the handling of the milk.

[housewolf]

2. I've been using raw milk for about 6 months now

I don't pasteurize it, just use it as it comes.

I found the farm on the recommendation of friends-of-a-friend who had been drinking it for a while. Don't know of anyone having any problem with it.

I gotta say, it's one of the most delicious foods I've ever tasted. It's full-fat, non-homoginized milk (gotta shake it up before pouring) from pasture & organically-fed cows. It's wonderful stuff.

[Lionessa]

3. So where's the harm in pasteurizing at home just for safety, you don't

eat raw meat, I assume, why risk it with raw milk? I guess I just don't get the point. I get the point to starting raw and processing less, like only pasteurizing and not homogenizing. Just not the point to risking raw from cows.

[housewolf]

11. Effects of Pasteurization

From http://www.raw-milk-facts.com

Effects of Pasteurization:

The ultimate goal in heat treating milk is the destruction of all pathogenic or disease-causing microbes. Usually (but not always), assuming the machinery is functioning properly, the process accomplishes this task effectively.

Numerous studies have shown, however, that bad bugs are not the only thing destroyed by the heat: delicate proteins, enzymes, immune factors, hormones, vitamins, mineral availability- all undergo definite changes during the heating process. No one seriously disputes this fact.

What is not clear though, due to conflicting science and belief systems, is to what extent the food value of the milk is actually impacted. When man-made nutrients (often inferior to their natural form) must be added back in to replace those destroyed by heat, there is no argument. The quality of the milk has suffered.

And who speaks for the hundreds of factors and components present in raw milk, known and unknown, that synergistically create a whole, healing food?

What truly becomes of raw milk's many natural hormones, immune modulators and enzymes if, say, certain other key substances designed to assist their proper function are ultimately destroyed (and not replaced)?

[Thor_MN]

15. You believe that a cow's immune system has benefits for you?

How did you type that with your hoofs? How do those delicate proteins survive the acid bath of your stomach(s)? Many people seriously dispute the woo you are spewing.

I will give you one point, there is conflict between the science that says the raw milk woo is crap and the faith/beliefs that there are magic properties in raw milk.

[Major Nikon]

45. You believe it doesn't?

So what? There's no hard evidence that organic produce is better for you than the alternative either, yet that doesn't stop people from buying it. Science doesn't always have the answers to everything, so in the absence of hard proof either way who is to say what people can and should consume? The only relevant argument is safety, and it's quite possible to produce, market, and consume raw milk that's just as safe as the alternative. Lots of countries do. One of the reasons why you can't get certain types of good cheese in the US is because of an antiquated requirement for pasteurization or aging of cheese that's sold state to state.

[fasttense]

67. Actually considering humankind has been drinking milk from other mammals

since mankind discovered farming, we probably have evolved someway to take advantage of a cow's, goat's, or sheep's immune system as presented in the milk product.

What we haven't evolved is a system to take advantage of runny hormone and antibiotic laced white crap out of a plastic bottle from a sick and abused cow.

Be afraid of natural foods, be very afraid or some corporation wont make a million today.

[fasttense]

68. Actually considering humankind has been drinking milk from other mammals

since mankind discovered farming, we probably have evolved someway to take advantage of a cow's, goat's, or sheep's immune system as presented in the milk product.

What we haven't evolved is a system to take advantage of runny hormone and antibiotic laced white crap out of a plastic bottle from a sick and abused cow.

Be afraid of natural foods, be very afraid or some corporation wont make a million today.

[yellowcanine]

21. OTOH, what good are all of the alleged benefits of raw milk if you are dead?

Unlike the alleged benefits, the science is clear about the risks of raw milk. Yes I drank it also when I was a kid. But it was from our cows, we knew exactly how it was collected and transported to the milk house cooler, it was cooled down immediately and remained cool from the milk house cooler to the kitchen fridge. I would not dream of drinking raw milk the way some of the proponents are drinking it. You only have to be wrong once.

There is a lot of nonsense proclaimed by the raw milk advocates.
1. Raw milk is not necessarily organic milk and it is not necessarily from grazing dairies.
2. Grazing cows does not make raw milk safer. It also does not make milk more nutritious.
3. Pasteurization and homogenization are two separate processes. You can have homogenized milk which is not pasteurized. You can have pasteurized milk which is not homogenized.
4. Not all raw milk is the same. Producers who have been trained and have the right equipment and facilities and inspection procedures can greatly reduce the risks associated with raw milk. Unfortunately many of the consumers of raw milk are not able to judge which producers are using best management practices to produce the raw milk.

[fasttense]

63. Be afraid, be afraid. That food is from a cow, it's from the ground, it's not from a box or bottle.

This fear mongering over natural foods is really silly.

First off the nutritional benefits of natural foods have NOT been fully evaluated. Every now and then General Mills or some other huge processed food manufacturer with factories in Mexico comes out with some study done by paid off scientists to tell us how dangerous natural foods are.

I don't buy it. People have been drinking raw milk for about as long as humankind has had agriculture.

I had a group of 8th graders tour my farm last year as a program for inner city children. When I reached out, picked off a grape tomato and ate it, they all went ewwwww. I pointed out that I used no chemicals or pesticides on my tomatoes. That right after a rain was the best time to eat the fresh food right off the vine. One little girl said, "but it's from the ground outside, and not from a clean box or plastic bag."

We have convinced our children that food has to come from a bag, box or container, preferable fully processed by some underpaid, foreign worker. I think it is even more important to know where and how your food is made and processed than it is to worry over homogenization or pasteurization. But today when you buy a gallon of milk, you don't know from where it came. You don't get to see the cows, you don't get to see the barn. All you know is that some corporation is telling you it is safe to drink and our deregulation frenzied government backs them up.

[Scruffy1]

31. not to mention the benefits of listeria, tuberculosis and brucellosis.

This pseudo scientific web sites give me he creeps. They prey on the ignorant.

[Major Nikon]

60. What exactly do you think is pseudo scientific about it?

Here's a few nuggets of information you might be interested in. Do you know why commercial milk is almost always pasteurized? You might think the primary reason is because of the pathogens you listed, but this is far from the only reason and not even the primary one. The primary reason milk is pasteurized in modern times is because pasteurized milk has a longer shelf life. The reason it has a longer shelf life is because the bacteria which cause milk to spoil(different bacteria than the ones you listed) are also killed during the pasteurization process. So even if all regulations regarding the pasteurization of milk were abolished, commercial milk producers would still be pasteurizing their milk, and not because they are worried that you might die from unpasteurized milk but simply because it increases their bottom line. That's why you don't see large scale milk producers screaming for pasteurization requirements to be lifted. In fact they have a vested interest in keeping those regulations in place because it eliminates competition from smaller scale producers who might want to produce milk products for a specialized market.

Milk that's unpasteurized can and is produced which is even MORE safe than pasteurized milk. You are probably in disbelief about right now and will no doubt go digging into all sorts of statistics that say people get sick from unpasteurized milk at a higher rate. Save yourself the trouble. The reason why unpasteurized milk is potentially more safe than pasteurized milk is because of something called competitive exclusion. In a nutshell, competitive exclusion means good bacteria can suppress or reduce the formation of bad bacteria. Once you kill the good bacteria, you loose all potential benefits of competitive exclusion. Pasteurized milk is much more susceptible to pathogen contamination after the pasteurization process has been completed. Notice I was careful to say "potentially". This doesn't mean that it always is safer. Safe unpasteurized milk production requires different feed requirements, different animal handling requirements, and different cleaning requirements compared to pasteurized milk production. If you just skip the pasteurization step, you don't wind up with a safer product, and this is why people get sick more often from unpasteurized milk.

Unpasteurized milk is being produced that's perfectly safe, and that has everything to do with real science.

[boppers]

4. Darwin at work again.

Any guesses as to whether or not the parents will be arrested and prosecuted for child abuse?

[saras]

5. When they find the source of the E. Coli, which wasn't the milk, that will dictate what they do next

But your personal prejudice will likely have little or nothing to do with it.

[boppers]

6. "which wasn't the milk"

It could be the milk bottles, the bottle lids, etc.

[housewolf]

7. The CDC recently admitted that there have only been 2 deaths from raw milk in recent years

The real problem with raw dairy is fresco queso, a cheese made from raw milk.

In recent years, the problems with e. coli contamination has come from produce - oh, and how many kids died or were made severely ill from fast-food cooked hamburgers?

Raw milk producers do not want to distribute milk contaminated with e. coli. There are safe-handling methods and procedures. The cows are tested and the equipment is tested regularly. All bottling equipment is sterilized prior to use.

[boppers]

8. From the meat or the lettuce?

:evilgrin:

[housewolf]

10. One in particular that I'm remember

was the meat. That's why restaurants & fast food places are required to cook hamburgers to 155 degrees instead of the 140 degrees that used to be the standard. It's why you can't get a medium-rare hamburger anywhere any more.

This was a big Jack In The Box issue a while back. Here's a recent case
http://efoodalert.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/hamburgers-confirmed-source-of-french-e-coli-outbreak/


This might be of interest to you:
Hamburger’s secret and deadly ingredients revealed by top chief

“An enormous percentage of burger meat in this country now contains scraps from the outer part of the animal that were once deemed sufficiently ‘safe’ only for pet food,” says the American chef Anthony Bourdain in his book “Medium Raw” that warns people about why there’s so much E.coli in hamburger today. There was talk that the popular Bourdain – author of “Kitchen Confidential” and the popular television show “No Reservations” – would be at the famous Powell’s Books in Portland this past summer to sign his new book “Medium Raw: A Bloody Valentine to the World of Food and the People Who Cook.”

However, Bourdain had a change of plans but Portland fans got a first look at this “instant New York Times bestseller” that warns Americans to be wary of the “mystery meat” in the hamburger they eat. “An amalgam of meat from different slaughterhouses” is how the New York Times describes what’s for dinner tonight, writes Bourdain whose demanding that hamburger meat become safe to eat again so he can have his favorite burger “medium rare” again.

Tainted E.coli hamburger now a an American staple

“When I read in the New York Times that, as standard practice, when making their ‘American Chef’s Selection Angus Beef Patties,’ the food giant Cargill’s recipe for hamburger consisted of, among other things, ‘a mix of slaughterhouse trimmings and a mash-like product derived from scraps’ and that ‘the ingredients came from slaughterhouses in Nebraska, Texas and Uruguay, and from a South Dakota company that processes fatty trimmings and treats them with ammonia to kill bacteria,’ I was surprised,” writes Bourdain who surprised readers with his classic “Kitchen Confidential.”

In “Kitchen Confidential” – an international bestseller by a chef’s chef who worked in the restaurant industry for 30 plus years – Bourdain first alerted Americans to the idiosyncrasies and lurking perils of simply eating out in America. Bourdain exposed “Monday fish,” per why one should never eat fish at a restaurants on Monday’s, and other secrets about food from Bourdain’s subculture of chefs and cooks that know what they’re talking about when it comes to hamburger and other food safety.

He goes on to state that “Cargill” is the largest private company in America, earning $116 billion in revenue a year, with the bulk of Cargill products being hamburger.

“But they are very cautious when pressed on the specifics,” adds Bourdain. “When asked to describe the kind of scraps used in a particular brand of hamburger, they will invariably describe the trimmings as coming from premium cuts like sirloin, rib and tenderloin.

“The better question might be: Please tell me which of these scraps you would have been unable to use a few years ago – and exactly what do you have to do to them to make them what you would consider ‘safe.’”

Moreover, Bourdain argues that although America’s meat-industry points to only a small percentage of their hamburger products that end up having to be recalled; “we eat a lot of beef in this country. However small that percentage, that’s still a lot of hamburger.”

Hamburger is mostly “mystery meat” these days, says Bourdain and other top American chefs

Bourdain describes the hamburger you eat as “scraps that have to be whipped or extracted or winnowed out or rendered before they can put them into a patty mix. Mystery meat assembled from all over the world and put through one grinder – like one big, group grope in moist, body-temperature sheets – with strangers.”

In turn, Bourdain is demanding that something be done about all the tainted, E.coli, mystery meat that kids eat each and every day across America while playing Russian Roulette with their lives. In short, hamburger is a major health concern in America today, states this famous chef.

At the same time, Bourdain states his beliefs in “Medium Raw.”

-- “I believe that, as an American, I should be able to walk into any restaurant in America and order my hamburger – that most American of foods – medium fxxxing rare. I don’t believe my hamburger should have to come with a warning to cook it well done to kill off any potential contaminants or bacteria."
-- “I believe that I shouldn’t have to be advised to thoroughly clean and wash up immediately after preparing a hamburger."
-- “I believe I should be able to treat my hamburger like food, not like infectious fxxxing medical waste."
-- “I believe the worlds ‘meat’ and ‘treated with ammonia’ should never occur in the same paragraph – much less the same sentence.”

Overall, Bourdain said the hamburger scare in America is caused by “our insatiable lust for cheap meat.”
http://www.huliq.com/10282/hamburger-ecoli-outbreaks-revealed-book-called-poisoned


more:
Ohio Ground Beef E. coli Outbreak Prompts Tyson Hamburger Recall
Posted on September 28, 2011 by PritzkerLaw

An Ohio E. coli outbreak has prompted a ground beef recall by Tyson Fresh Meats Inc. as state and federal health experts investigate a possible connection. The E. coli O157:H7 illnesses are located in Butler County, an area north of Cincinnati centered in Hamilton, Ohio.

USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service published the Tyson recall notice (see below) for 131,300 pounds of ground beef after the agency was notified of the Ohio outbreak, which has illness onset dates rangining from September 8 through September 11. The Class I High Health Risk recall did not say how many people have been sickened or whether the outbreak involves cases of HUS, or hemolytic uremic syndrome.

National E. coli lawyers at PritzkerOlsen, P.A., also are investigating this ground beef outbreak, providing free consultation for victims interested in an Ohio E. coli lawsuit at 1-888-377-8900 (Toll Free). Our law firm is one of the very few in the country practicing extensively in the area of foodborne illness litigation and we have collected tens of millions of dollars for E. coli victims around the country.

USDA said the on-going investigation involved collecting leftover ground beef from the "patients’ home" on Sept. 19. The sample tested positive for E. coli O157:H7 by the Ohio Department of Agriculture’s laboratory.

The recall involves certain Kroger-brand ground beef, Butcher's Brand ground beef and generic label ground beef shipped to distribution centers in Ohio, Indiana, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Illinois, Missouri, New York, Texas and Wisconsin. The potentially contaminated ground beef was produced by Tyson in Emporia, Kansas.

http://foodpoisoning.pritzkerlaw.com/archives/e-coli-lawyer-ohio-ground-beef-e-coli-outbreak-prompts-tyson-hamburger-recall.html

[freshwest]

23. Yes, the meat has been getting weirder all the time. Thanks for the info.

[yellowcanine]

24. "There are safe-handling methods and procedures." Yes and how do you know they were used?

Some states have a certification program (Pennsylvania). But

(a) Some raw milk producers do not cooperate and sell raw milk anyway.
(b) Inspection procedures and protocols vary by state. California is less strict than Pennsylvania, for example.
(c) States do not have the manpower to verify that procedures are being followed. Much of the compliance is self-reported. An unscrupulous or careless producer or employee can fail to follow procedures, particularly in the area of accurate record keeping. People are often working alone, there is no one checking. Tests can be taken improperly or even faked.

[housewolf]

41. Yes, you do have to be careful

And do your research so that you feel confident that your raw milk dairy complies with safe handling requirements.

I looked for a small and local-to-me dairy. Talked with others who have been customers of the dairy for various months/years. The dairy is open for visitors. Research their farming practices. You can research their history of compliance re sanitation.

And even with all that, I had to keep reminding myself that life is full of risks. And then I took responsibility for myself and made the choice.

Not without trepidation, I must say. My grandfather owned and ran a dairy in the first half of the 20th century. My mother often expressed a huge fear of what she called "milk fever", by which I think she meant listeria.

And then I was shocked and delighted with how different raw milk is from pasteurized, and how oh so much more delicious it is.

[StarsInHerHair]

50. I have that cheese, it IS pasteurized, at least the 1 I have

[jmowreader]

57. It could have also been a little bit of cow shit in the milk

The place the milk comes out of on a cow and the place the shit comes out of are NOT that far apart, and e.coli is intestinal flora. It is not inconceivable that someone messed up a little and got some shit in the milk--it wouldn't take much--and that's what caused the problem.

[Thor_MN]

16. They could not find the strain in the CURRENT milk

Milk is not a constant, each individual milking of a cow could contaminate a batch of milk. The next batch may have no, or probably better said, not enough contamination to cause a health effect. One could probably go out and lick one's sidewalk on most days and not get sick. Don't know why one would want to place russian roulette with people walking their dogs, but I'm not sure why one would want to play russian roulette with raw milk either.

[NashVegas]

20. Most Food-Born Illnesses Show Up FAST

within, what? 12 hours? 24. Odds are some milk from the original batch is still available.

That said, this dairy has previously been in the news for e.coli

I'm in favor of raw milk being available for those who want it and are willing to accept the risks.

[Sgent]

40. Nope

12-24 hour food poisoning is only if the food is toxic (contains actual toxins) when ingested. Bacterial contamination usually takes 48 hours, although can be 24 in some cases.

[alp227]

9. This case also challenges libertarians and hippies

who'd shun the USDA or science in favor of the "natural diet"...natural being loaded, fallacious language anyway.

[boppers]

12. Cyanide is natural.

So is Uranium.

[SpiralHawk]

13. ...or it may be just another Big Ag Black Ops

'incident' - among many.

[Archae]

14. "Raw milk" is a fraud.

It has no nutrients that aren't in pasteurized milk.

And raw milk is dangerous. PERIOD.

[harun]

17. All food is potentially dangerous. And there is more to a healthy diet

than just nutrients. For example if all the beneficial flora of your gut die, you can get all the nutrients you want and it won't matter. You won't be able to digest them properly. See C-diff on Wikipedia for an example of the problems that can arise.

Also you should be more specific. Babies drink raw milk every day from their mothers. A blanket statement of "raw milk is dangerous" goes against the process of life.

Now about the specific question of should people be giving raw cows milk to young children, hell frickin no.

[Godhumor]

19. Raw milk in the context of this thread I would take to mean cow based

Wouldn't treat what the poster said a a blanket statement. Nor in my post later in the thread.

[AlecBGreen]

26. illogical

cooked veggies =/= raw veggies
cooked fruit =/= raw fruit

yet somehow cooked milk = raw milk?

explain please

[NickB79]

42. Pasteurization is not cooking

To pasteurize milk, it is flash-heated to 161F for 20 seconds. That's it. Not even brought to boiling.

[Major Nikon]

43. It is cooking

A steak cooked to medium has an internal temperature of 145 degrees which is considerably less than your stated pasteurization temp of 161.

[NickB79]

52. And how long is that steak on the grill to reach 145F?

Both time AND temperature are vital to the process of cooking.

Would you call a steak on the grill for 20 sec cooked?

[Major Nikon]

54. Both time AND temperature are vital to the process of pasteurization

Pasteurization is just a specific type of cooking where the goal is to reduce the pathogen count at or below a prescribed level. You can do it with a high temp and short time, or a lower temp and a longer time. Here's a pasteurization chart for beef:


The same is true for milk, eggs, wine, beer, or whatever else you want to pasteurize. It is cooking and perfectly fits the definition of cooking. It's just a specific type of cooking.

[NickB79]

56. Again, would you call a steak grilled for 20 sec cooked?

You post a picture of beef pasteurization that goes into HOURS of cooking time, and you find that comparable to flash-heating milk?

[Major Nikon]

58. Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying

If you follow the graph, you can see that I can pasteurize milk by cooking it for 30 min at 62.8°C. In fact, before relatively modern heat exchangers made the HST process practical, that's exactly how milk was pasteurized (and still is in some places). It's called vat pasteurization. So if you can't wrap your mind around how grilling a steak and running milk through a heat exchanger are both cooking methods, consider cooking milk in a vat for 30 minutes if it makes it easier for you. The goal of pasteurization is to reduce the pathogen count to a specific level. You can do this with lower temps, longer time, or higher temps, shorter time. Either way it's still cooking, and just like what you might normally think of as cooking it makes fundamental changes to the food. Vitamins are degraded. Proteins are denatured. Sugars change molecular structure. Beneficial bacteria are killed. Taste and texture are changed. That is the essence of cooking. This happens whether the milk is cooked for 20 seconds or 30 minutes.

[fasttense]

28. From the age of 13 to 19 I drank raw milk constantly.

We got it from the dairy down the road. We would get 1 gallon jars, sterilize them and take them to the farmer who filled them up from his big metal vat of milk. His barn was so clean you could use it as a kitchen.

When I took ill in my 20s from a problem causing the severe loss of blood, when aids had just been discovered and my doctor was afraid to give me blood infusions for fear I would catch the disease (they had not developed a test for the virus in the blood supply yet), I was given nothing but vitamins. After each major loss of blood, I would create more blood from my bones. My doctor was amazed at how quickly I replaced the lost blood.

I am convinced I survived because of that raw milk.

A similar patient had to take the risk of blood transfusions (she never caught aids, thank God) because she could not replace the blood lost. She never drank raw milk.

Raw milk, from a trusted dairy is the best thing you can do for your kids health.

[AngryAmish]

30. Why are you convinced of this?

This is a serious question.

[fasttense]

62. Because I asked the doctor why I was able to recover so quickly

when my hospitalized roommate was suffering so.

We aren't talking about a little bit of blood loss here. It could have killed me if the bleeding had gone on for another 5 minutes.

He said it was because my bones were so strong. He said someone made you drink your milk as a child. (thanks Mom.)

And when I asked my roommate if she had a lot of milk to drink as a child, she laughed and said Kool Aide was her mother's preferred beverage for children.

Drinking raw milk will not hurt you. I'm living proof. You just have to be careful about the farmer. Make sure he/she has a clean environment for milking and the cows are healthy.

[Codeine]

37. Any non-human milk is horrible for you.

Nothing sucked out of a cow's tit on an industrial scale is meant to be guzzled by little people.

[fasttense]

66. Mankind has been drinking milk since they started farming. It's perfectly natural

to drink milk from other mammals. In fact, I'll bet we have evolved specifically to take advantage of milk products from other mammals since mankind has been doing it for so long.

What we have NOT evolved is drinking runny, white hormone and antibiotic laced crap in a plastic bottle from sick and abused animals.

[Odin2005]

32. Raw milk is tastier.

[Major Nikon]

51. It's also better for certain types of cheeses

Both Brie and Camembert cheeses sold in France are required by French law to be made from unpasteurized milk. They are both far better than anything you'll find in the US which requires them to be made with pasteurized milk if it crosses state lines. The French eat these cheeses every day in great quantity all over the country with little to no health problems, yet it would be illegal in the US to sell the same product. Go figure.

[Major Nikon]

44. Raw milk isn't a fraud

Not everything that contributes to health can be broke down in nutrient content alone. Pasteurization destroys all sorts of enzymes, immunoglobulins, beneficial bacteria and other compounds that do have a positive health benefit.

Raw milk is not inherently more dangerous than pasteurized milk depending on production methods. If the cow is fed a diet of grass, not only is the potential for harmful bacteria lessened compared to grain fed cows, but beneficial bacteria are more prevalent which prevent harmful bacteria from reaching dangerous levels due to a process called competitive exclusion. The problem in the US is that some areas allow raw milk to be produced from cows that are grain fed, which is not a great idea. Lots of countries allow the sale of raw milk with no serious consequences for public health, especially compared to pasteurized milk. People can and do get sick from pasteurized milk also. Once milk is pasteurized it's even more vulnerable to contamination compared to raw milk because the beneficial bacteria have been destroyed also thus negating the potential benefit of competitive exclusion.

[Archae]

46. Prove it.

[Major Nikon]

47. So you want me to disprove what was your assertion in the first place?

:crazy:

Try proving yours first and we'll go from there. Fair enough?

[Godhumor]

18. Giving raw milk to children is just an awful, awful idea. Shame on the guardians.

Of course, raw milk is just an awful idea in general.

[AngryAmish]

22. Who would give a kid raw milk?

The same kind of shithead who would drink it themselves because of the magical properties in the milk.

The same kind of shithead who thinks that they can never get sick because they "know and trust" the farmer selling them that stuff.

[AlecBGreen]

27. heat denatures vitamins

thats why raw fruits & veggies are healthier for you. Why would milk be different? :shrug:

[AngryAmish]

29. And the percentage of malnourished due to vitamin deficiency in the US is?

I, for one, have a hard time walking down the street without beri beri victims everywhere.

[Major Nikon]

59. That's not the point

If a food product can be produced safely (and unpasteurized milk most certainly can be produced safely), then people should be able to get it if they want it. It's really just that simple. Nobody is saying pasteurized milk should be taken off the shelves and replaced with unpasteurized milk.

[fasttense]

65. Actually according to the CDC it's going up.

The number of underweight, malnourished children in every age group has increased since the 2nd RepubliCON Great Depression first hit.

You only ever hear about the obesity problem. You rarely get reports about the increasing malnourishment in the US.

[NickB79]

53. Commercial milk loses vitamins primarily from fat extraction

When you take out the cream component of whole milk, you remove most of the fat-soluble vitamins found in the milk. The brief heating due to pasteurization has very little effect in comparison.

If you're that concerned about vitamin loss, drink whole milk instead.

[Zoeisright]

61. Not true.

Some nutrients in vegetables are more available after they are cooked. For instance, beta-carotene in carrots is more bio-available after cooking.

Raw beans contain a toxin that cooking destroys.

Minerals in vegetables are more available to the body after cooking.

Cruciferous vegetables can inhibit your thyroid if eating raw in large quantities.

And the acid in your stomach denatures vitamins, far more than are destroyed by cooking.

[Major Nikon]

70. There's a big difference between milk and legumes

Certainly cooking is going to free certain vitamins in certain types of food, but this is not true for milk. There are no vitamins more available after the pasteurization of milk and many that are destroyed or degraded. As far as stomach acids go, that is going to have a different effect on vitamins than cooking does, so you can't really compare the two.

Pasteurization degrades or destroys most of the B complex. Vitamin C is destroyed, as well as others. You can feed an infant raw milk and they will get all the vitamins they need, but this is not true for pasteurized milk. Many studies have shown that children get sick less often when fed raw milk compared to kids fed pasteurized milk. Not all of this is related to pasteurization itself, however pasteurized milk has a longer shelf life and some vitamins are degraded by time and exposure to light.

Now I'm not going to say that vitamins alone are really a huge issue with pasteurized milk in a modern American society because it's easy enough to get those from other sources. This was really more of an issue when milk and bread were the primary nutritional instrument of the public in many areas and those days are long gone.

[Odin2005]

34. I grew up in a rural area and drank plent of raw milk given by relatives.

[fasttense]

69. But the shit-head who trusts Wally World to give them runny white crap from a bottle

is all so smart?

Mankind has evolved with drinking other mammal's milk. It's a fact, look it up. Mankind has been drinking other mammal's milk since they have been farming. It's natural, it's in our evolution, it's part of farming.

What we haven't evolved into is drinking runny white hormone and antibiotic laced crap out of a plastic bottle from sick and abused cows. But that's what you get every time you pick up a gallon of milk from the Quicky-Mart.

Because we know corporations have only our best interest in mind especially when our deregulation frenzied government tells them it's a ok.

[BlueToTheBone]

25. I grew up on raw milk and love having it again

I make yogurt and cheese and butter/ghee and drink it right out of the bottle. I know the farmer whose cow it is and know that she keeps everything clean. I call it a blessing to have real food.

[Odin2005]

33. I see the pro-big-agribusiness nannies are out in force in this thread.

[LanternWaste]

35. That is indeed the only possible explanation

That is indeed the only possible explanation when confronted with a different opinion.

[KittyWampus]

55. Only comment I"ll make on this thread> it's telling the abusive language used by those virulently

against the choice of drinking raw milk.

[Codeine]

38. Alternatively, it could be be people concerned with food safety.

Of course it's harder to make a snide attack from that, but it is an actual possibility. . .

[Major Nikon]

49. Or it could be people concerned with irrational fear

Billions of people drink raw milk every day. Few get sick.

[fasttense]

64. How safe is milk that you have no idea from where it came?

All you know when you buy a gallon of milk from Wal-Mart is that some corporation tells you it's safe to drink and our deregulation frenzied government backs them up. It could be white yak piss for all you know.

When was the last time you trusted a corporation to have your best interest in mind?

Find out exactly where your food comes from before you tout the wonders of it's safety.

[Major Nikon]

71. Even if you know where it comes from, that doesn't necessarily make it safer

The problem with some unpasteurized milk is it should never be fed to anyone. This isn't really an inherent problem with unpasteurized milk, but has more to do with the modern feeding and handling methods of some dairy cows.

The pasteurization of milk became necessarily when milk cows were herded into feed lots and fed a diet of grain. Milk from grain fed cows don't develop as much of the beneficial bacteria that keep pathogens at bay. Also feed lot cows live in an environment where their feces and mud mix together and constantly soil their udders. These things aren't really a problem with cows that live in a pasture and live on a diet of grass. So the milk from some cows should always be pasteurized, and the problem comes in when dairy farmers provide this unpasteurized milk to their family, friends, and neighbors. People can and do get sick from this milk, just like they did back in the 30's before the widespread use of pasteurization.

So basically pasteurization was borne out of necessity because cows were living in their own feces and eating an unnatural diet. Rather than developing regulations to reduce the amount of cow feces in milk and feed cows a proper diet of field grasses (which would have been more expensive), milk was pasteurized to make it safer for the public. That way we can have our cake (feces) and eat it too.

[kestrel91316]

36. I support commercial raw milk provided that it is regulated by safety standards

just like pasteurized milk. It CAN be safely produced.

Personally I would only ever drink raw milk from cows I owned and milked myself. But other people should have the right to consume it as long as they are advised of the risks and those risks are minimized.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. in india we buy our milk raw, and pasteurize at home

i think when people switch to natural ways, they should look into what older culture do with their food.

[JVS]

48. Oh dear! How could this have been prevented?