What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** Official Raw Milk Thread *** (1 Viewer)

Will they stop selling raw milk cheeses? Do they prohibit this already?Raw milk cheeses are ####### awesome.Why don't they slap a freaking warning label on the raw milk warning the customers if it's that dangerous.BTW, I drink ultra-pasteurized non-fat milk that comes in a cardboard box that lasts for months on my pantry shelf.
By federal law, no raw-milk cheese is allowed to be sold unless it is aged at least 60 days. That's fine for cheddar, Parmigiano Reggiano, Pecorino Romano, Manchego, Comté, Laguiole, and Roquefort. But it means that there's no such thing as top-notch Brie or Camembert or mozzarella or any other young cheeses in the States.
Unless you make your own
 
Update from Mark McAfee (of Organic Pastures Dairy):

Dear Raw Milk SupportersFirst of all, the consumer uprising in the face of the “AB1735 Raw Milk Surprise” has been tremendous. Faxes, voicemails, emails and letters are virtually saturating members of the Assembly, CDFA, and the Governor’s office. We are making solid progress thanks to this wonderful support.Two weeks ago I requested a meeting with CDFA staff and legislative representatives to review elements of AB1735 and present important scientific information not included or reviewed during the “very quiet” legislative process. This information included USDA peer reviewed research, University studies, CDC data, and other essential information missed because no meaningful or representative debate occurred when the bill was passed.The meeting, held in Sacramento on Monday, October 29th, was well attended by senior Ph.D. staff from CDFA, assembly staff representatives, and Agricultural Committee staff. After about ninety minutes, senior staff at CDFA committed to working with us to find a mutually agreeable solution to the issues.My key statements included the following: “I have so much compelling information, and so little time to present it. Although we and our consumers are the major stakeholders in AB 1735, we were neither notified of, nor invited to the formal legislative process. This is an outrage, and amounts to legislation without representation.”I stated my viewpoint that pasteurized dairy products and raw dairy products can and should co-exist. There was complete agreement on this point, yet initial disagreement on what that should look like.While the CDFA scientists conceded no pathogens have ever been found at OPDC in seven years of testing, they insisted that California raw milk codes be harmonized with FDA codes. I disagreed adamantly. How can our state codes possibly align with those of a federal agency that badly misconstrues the nature of raw milk, using phrases such as “playing Russian Roulette with your life.”The message got through loud and clear and we now have a firm commitment from CDFA to work together and resolve this issue quickly and effectively.Our panel (see below) has submitted a five point plan - along with a three inch thick ream of pathogen test data and University research -to the CDFA and the legislative committee. We will meet again very shortly to discuss the proposal and lay the groundwork for resolution.I have sent a letter to the Governor’s office requesting a meeting as soon as possible. Gov. Schwarzenegger is perhaps the most progressive governor California has ever had regarding health issues. It is doubtful he had any idea that AB1735 contained a hidden surprise that would threaten raw milk. How could he have known? There were no discussions or debate.It is essential that your voices continue to be heard. Keep pressing your assembly members and the Governor for support. (See www.organicpastures.com/contact_lawmakers.html for contact information.) It appears that a new bill will need to be introduced to overturn elements of AB1735, including additional safeguards to secure the future of sustainable, safe, fresh, delicious, and nutritious raw milk for the years to come.In California, raw milk is a sacred food. The consumption of raw milk is an intentional act and not done by error or mistake. Consumption of raw milk is a freedom preserved by longstanding California Food and Agriculture Code #35928 (F). This venerable raw milk law makes restriction of California raw milk illegal. Our arguments stand on solid ground.Even though the CDFA has promised full cooperation, it is still early in this process and many turns lay ahead. Look for updates on this historic showdown, and keep supporting the struggle to protect your fundamental right to eat any whole, unprocessed, natural food of your choosing.We are very grateful for the CDFA’s solid commitment to work with us, and feel hopeful about the future of raw milk.Mark McAfee, Founder OPDCOur expert panel includes:Jan Krancher, Ph.D. Nutrition - retired county health inspectorDale Jacobson, D.C. - practices in Nevada CityPaul Spiegel, Esq., - raw milk consumer with interest in raw artisan cheesesRick Jefferies - political consultant and activistMark McAfee, Founder OPDC - organic farmer, retired paramedic, county health educatorAnna Catharina Berge DVM, State of CA - epidemiologistPS In another secret legislative process earlier this year, you lost your right to buy truly raw almonds at the grocery store. Let this not be the year we also lose raw milk!Mark
 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Update from Mark McAfee (of Organic Pastures Dairy):

PS In another secret legislative process earlier this year, you lost your right to buy truly raw almonds at the grocery store. Let this not be the year we also lose raw milk!Mark
:thumbup:
 
Raw milk is disgusting. It's like drinking white motor oil.
that's where you get the yummy growth hormones and antibiotics. :no:
Hormones and antibiotics don't go in raw milk. They go in conventional, pasteurized milk.The raw milk producers in California raise their cows on pasture -- about an acre of pasture per cow. Not in feedlots, where cows stand in their own feces their whole lives and are generally diseased (hence the need for antibiotics and pasteurization).
They don't give growth hormones to cows to make them produce more milk?
I know there are some organic dairies that don't use hormones or anti-biotics as well as grass feeding their cows. You can buy steaks from similar places as well, but you'll pay a pretty penny for them.I imagine that the decrease in production efficiency leads to the $18/gallon price of the raw milk.

Thanks for the heads up Maurile. Most of my favorite Spanish cheeses are aged raw-milk cheeses (Idiazábal and Cabrales), both of which I've seen in the US.
Wrong. Purchased retail can be less than organic beef and purchased in bulk can be cheaper than non-organic meat. This is all I buy.
 
Maurile,

Thanks for the update. I'm writing an email to my rep right now via the info in this link: www.organicpastures.com/contact_lawmakers.html

BTW, I saw some raw milk Brie at the store yesterday and was tempted to buy it. It was about 75% more expensive than the run-of-the-mill Brie found in the store (about 20€/kilo for the good stuff).

 
Will they stop selling raw milk cheeses? Do they prohibit this already?Raw milk cheeses are ####### awesome.Why don't they slap a freaking warning label on the raw milk warning the customers if it's that dangerous.BTW, I drink ultra-pasteurized non-fat milk that comes in a cardboard box that lasts for months on my pantry shelf.
By federal law, no raw-milk cheese is allowed to be sold unless it is aged at least 60 days. That's fine for cheddar, Parmigiano Reggiano, Pecorino Romano, Manchego, Comté, Laguiole, and Roquefort. But it means that there's no such thing as top-notch Brie or Camembert or mozzarella or any other young cheeses in the States.
I don't get this shtick. ... and your milk argument lost me at "Colostrum."
 
Will they stop selling raw milk cheeses? Do they prohibit this already?Raw milk cheeses are ####### awesome.Why don't they slap a freaking warning label on the raw milk warning the customers if it's that dangerous.BTW, I drink ultra-pasteurized non-fat milk that comes in a cardboard box that lasts for months on my pantry shelf.
By federal law, no raw-milk cheese is allowed to be sold unless it is aged at least 60 days. That's fine for cheddar, Parmigiano Reggiano, Pecorino Romano, Manchego, Comté, Laguiole, and Roquefort. But it means that there's no such thing as top-notch Brie or Camembert or mozzarella or any other young cheeses in the States.
I don't get this shtick. ... and your milk argument lost me at "Colostrum."
What's shtick here? Wanting to enjoy fine dairy products?This sort of crap is the same reason that jamón iberico wasn't sold in the US for a long time. It's bull#### thinking not based on empirical data. Unless laziness or rudeness can be traced back to ham, I think the Spanish have done just fine eating quite a bit of jamón iberico.BTW, you should try some if you ever get a hold of any. It's divine.
 
From the Belfast Telegraph:

Is raw milk safe?

Unpasteurised milk is the latest superfood - nutritious, delicious and packed with friendly bacteria. But is it safe?

By Anastasia Stephens

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Prince Charles has been a fan for years. Now the health-conscious tribes of LA and New York are claiming that it can help everything from childhood allergies and eczema to digestive disorders. Raw, unpasteurised milk, straight from the cow, is making a comeback - and it's starting to catch on over here.

Indeed, UK producers report that demand for the "real" white stuff is stronger than ever, and growing. Sold in "green label" bottles from farms and farmers' markets, popularity is spreading fast, mostly through personal recommendation.

At the Chelsea Farmers Market, raw milk is one of the most popular dairy products. And at Meadow Cottage Farm, a Surrey supplier, demand is outstripping supply. "We sell 50 litres a day but customer demand just seems to keep growing," says Celia Haynes of Meadow Cottage, which specialises in unpasteurised milk and cream produced by the family's herd of Jersey cows. "We don't just get local customers coming to the farm - people travel for miles, and buy in bulk. Unpasteurised milk has a rich but refreshing flavour which adults and children seem to love."

It's not just about the taste, though. One study published in The Internet Journal of Asthma, Allergy and Immunology found that raw milk reduced children's risk of suffering allergy-related conditions by up to 40 per cent. There are overall nutritional benefits, too. Proponents say that unpasteurised milk is so packed with nutrients that it's a virtual superfood. Unlike heat-treated milk, it is full of beneficial gut bacteria, known to improve digestion and immunity. Raw milk contains a full complement of folic acid, B vitamins, vitamin C, omega-3 fatty acids and other nutrients that are partially or completely destroyed in pasteurisation. Raw milk drinkers also benefit from digestive enzymes, as well as something called Wulzen factor, a compound that combats arthritis and arterial stiffening. Some people with a history of digestive tract problems such as Crohn's disease swear by the curative powers of unpasteurised milk; others praise its nutritional value and its ability to strengthen the immune system.

Proponents of raw milk argue that pasteurisation, a process in which milk is heated to 71C for short bursts followed by rapid cooling, destroys much of the nutrition in milk. For example, pasteurisation breaks down lactase, an enzyme that helps digest the milk-sugar lactose, meaning that lactose-intolerant individuals can drink raw milk but not pasteurised milk. Raw milk supporters also argue that pasteurisation renders calcium more difficult for the body to absorb. Meanwhile, the widespread process of homogenisation, in which the milk fat is evenly distributed throughout the liquid, can make the drink harder to digest.

The product remains controversial, though. It is potentially a source of food- poisoning bugs such as salmonella, listeria and E.coli. In Britain, the Food Standards Agency says tests on raw milk show that it can contain illness-causing pathogens. Scotland banned it 20 years ago; in England and Wales, sales are restricted to farmer's markets or directly from farm shops, with labels clearly warning of the risk.

"Pasteurisation is there as a safety net to kill off any bugs in milk," says Lisa Miles of the British Nutrition Foundation. "Without it, the risks would be just too great."

But the farmers who make it say that their raw milk is made to a strict standard. John Barron, of Beaconshill Farm in Herefordshire, points out that stringent regulations to ensure the safety of raw milk tend to mean that the cows are significantly healthier than those on commercial farms. "The simple fact is, we've never had a single case of food poisoning," he says.

Celia Haynes agrees. "We undergo four spot-checks a year, looking at the health and cleanliness of our animals," she says. "The milk itself has to undergo checks for levels of harmful bacteria to ensure it is safe. Think about it: healthier cows mean healthier milk."

The research has certainly been promising so far. Prompted by figures showing that children growing up on farms are less likely to develop allergies, scientists at the University of London gave children a couple of glasses of raw milk a week. They found that it seemed to cut their chances of developing hay fever by 10 per cent and eczema by 38 per cent. They also looked at blood samples from 4,700 primary-school children in Shropshire, and found that raw milk drinkers, most of whom lived on farms, had 60 per cent lower levels of immunoglobulin E - an antibody that the body's immune system pumps out in huge quantities on exposure to an allergen. Levels of histamine, another chemical that is released by cells during an allergic reaction, were halved.

These findings aren't news to raw milk producers: their customers report real improvements to their children's skin and respiratory health. "Our customers are convinced the milk is good for their health," says Barron. "Many have reported improvements to allergy symptoms in themselves or their children while drinking unpasteurised milk. Others have found that bloating and other digestive difficulties have settled down."

Sam Jennings, 42, a schoolteacher from Walton-on-Thames, Surrey, had his first taste of unpasteurised milk on holiday in the Channel Islands four years ago. "It was so delicious, we tracked down a local producer when we came home. It is really thirst quenching and pleasant, so we switched to it.

"Then we noticed a surprising change in our seven-year-old son. His lungs were often tight and wheezy. But after a few days of drinking the new milk, his breathing got better; his symptoms had pretty much disappeared. We are convinced the benefit came from the milk. On the occasions we've run out of it and gone back to the commercial variety, his wheezing has returned."

None the less, Lisa Miles warns that those who drink raw milk should be careful. "I'd advise pregnant women to steer clear, as should elderly people or those with weak immune systems," she says. "It may be popular and even healthy. But that doesn't necessarily mean its safe."

What's in raw milk

¢ According to the Campaign for Real Milk, a US-based organisation, raw milk contains 10 per cent more B vitamins and 25 per cent more vitamin C.

¢ Raw milk is rich in CLA, a "superfat" that helps promote weight loss and is alleged to have anti-cancer properties.

¢ Unlike pasteurised milk, raw milk contains the enzyme lactase, which breaks down the milk-sugar lactose. This means that it can be drunk by people who are lactose-intolerant.

¢ Raw milk generally contains more omega-3 fats, and as they're not corrupted by heat treatment, they're better for you.

¢ It's a rich source of probiotic bacteria, which boost immunity and aid digestion.

¢ It may be richer in nutrients and vitamins overall, as animals are grass-fed and kept to high standards. As many producers are organic, the milk is more likely to be free of growth hormones and antibiotics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
US Presidential Candidate Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would allow the transportation and sale raw milk and raw milk products.

Free Trade in Unpasteurized Milk

by Ron Paul

Introducing HR 4077 to Allow the Interstate Shipment of Unpasteurized Milk, November 6, 2007

Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation that allows the transportation and sale in interstate commerce of unpasteurized milk and milk products, as long as the milk both originates from and is shipped to states that allow the sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products. This legislation removes an unconstitutional restraint on farmers who wish to sell unpasteurized milk and milk products, and people who wish to consume unpasteurized milk and milk products.

My office has heard from numerous people who would like to purchase unpasteurized milk. Many of these people have done their own research and come to the conclusion that unpasteurized milk is healthier than pasteurized milk. These Americans have the right to consume these products without having the federal government second-guess their judgment about what products best promote health. If there are legitimate concerns about the safety of unpasteurized milk, those concerns should be addressed at the state and local level.

I urge my colleagues to join me in promoting consumers’ rights, the original intent of the Constitution, and federalism by cosponsoring my legislation to allow the interstate sale of unpasteurized milk and milk products.
 
I don't drink raw milk, but this just pisses me off. This is an obvious example of corporations controlling the government. Unreal.

 
More dairies go raw

Drinkers say unpasteurized milk contains good bacteria

By Darry Madden

Globe Correspondent / February 23, 2008

Jill Ebbott, a holistic health counselor in Brookline, buys 8 gallons of unpasteurized milk a week for her household of three people, and she pours a splash in the bowls that her three dogs eat from. She says a year of drinking raw milk has cleared up her husband's allergies.

"He suffered tree pollen allergies for 21 years," Ebbott said. "In the spring, he was swollen and oozing and had to wear mittens to bed so he didn't scratch himself too much. After 13 months on raw milk, his gut was rebalanced to such a degree that he was healed."

The US Food and Drug Administration warns on its website that drinking unpasteurized milk is "like playing Russian roulette with your health," but Ebbott is part of a growing number of people who reject the long-held belief that pasteurized milk is better for you. People who prefer raw milk say that pasteurization - the process of heating milk to kill bacteria - destroys good bacteria along with the bad.

Massachusetts is among 28 states in which raw milk can be sold for human consumption, and in the past two years the number of dairies licensed to sell it here has gone from 12 to 23. Dairies are selling more raw milk than they were five years ago, according to the Northeast Organic Farming Association, which says it receives calls weekly from consumers trying to find it.

Neither the association nor the Massachusetts Department of Agriculture keep records of how many gallons are produced, but farms say they are producing more raw milk than ever.

Cricket Creek Farm in Williamstown, for example, is primarily a cheese-making operation, but it began selling unpasteurized milk a year ago because customers kept asking for it.

Anecdotal evidence such as Ebbott's is common among people who drink raw milk. But science is beginning to weigh in, too. Researchers at the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Basel in Switzerland followed nearly 15,000 children ages 5 to 15 in Austria, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden, and Germany from 2001 to 2004. The study, sponsored by the European Union and published in 2007, found that children who drank raw milk had a lower incidence of asthma and allergies.

Spokesman Michael Herndon said the FDA advises against the consumption of raw milk because it is a welcoming host to pathogens such as listeria and salmonella. On its website, the FDA says there is no truth to the assertions that raw milk can cure allergies. The agency says children, the elderly, and people with weakened immune systems are particularly susceptible to the food-borne illnesses that can result from drinking unpasteurized milk.

Raw milk supporters see things differently. They say that although pasteurization kills dangerous bacteria and pathogens such as E. coli and listeria, it also destroys beneficial bacteria, enzymes, and raw fats that boost the immune system and aid digestion. Pasteurization usually goes hand in hand with homogenization, the process that breaks the fat globules in milk into smaller particles. The dairy industry homogenizes milk to prevent the cream from rising and to create a more uniform product, but raw milk advocates say that further corrupts the nutritional value of milk.

"Bottom line is that we're bacteria sapiens," said Mark McAfee, chief executive of Organic Pastures in Fresno, Calif., the nation's largest raw milk dairy. "We have to have good bacteria in our bodies."

more stories like this

Raw milk has been hotly debated in California recently; the state passed a bill late last year effectively banning the sale of raw milk, but is poised to repeal the law.

McAfee, whose $5 million annual business has grown about 25 percent a year, said Organic Pastures boasts an unblemished safety record over its seven years.

Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition, food studies, and public health at New York University, said the growing interest in unpasteurized milk nationally is part of a larger cultural shift toward using and eating food that hasn't been processed.

"It's part of the real food movement that says, 'If it's whole and unprocessed, it's better for me,' " said Nestle, author of several books, including "What to Eat," a guide to good nutrition. "Personally, I prefer my milk pasteurized. But on the other hand, I don't see why raw milk can't be produced according to food safety standards and tested for pathogens and be safe. The whole thing seems to be blown out of proportion."

Raw milk is strictly regulated in most of the 28 states in which it can be sold for human consumption. In Massachusetts, a dairy must be licensed by the state and get approval from the local board of health. Raw milk can be sold in stores in eight states, including Connecticut and Maine, but in Massachusetts in can be sold only at the dairy.

To deal with this rule, consumers have begun forming buying clubs.

Just Dairy, a club on the North Shore, started up in 2003 with just a few families, but now buys 250 gallons of milk a week from three farms in Central Massachusetts and delivers them to 143 families. Members pay a $10 weekly membership fee (to cover administrative costs and gas) and $6 to $8 per gallon of milk, the same price that the club pays the farmer. (A gallon of pasteurized milk costs about $3 to $4 at most supermarkets.)

Beyond health reasons, people who drink raw milk also favor its richer, creamier taste.

Cyndy Gray, who runs Just Dairy, said so many people are buying raw milk that she needs a bigger delivery truck to keep up with the club's growth. "I feel like I'm a farmer," said Gray, a former Coast Guard communications officer. "I'm coming at this with the same dedication that they do."

But there have been problems with raw milk. Last year the state closed nine licensed raw milk dairies for periods ranging from three days to four months for high bacteria counts in the milk, and temporarily shuttered another dairy for unsanitary conditions.

"I do believe it's a safe product," said Scott Soares, the assistant agricultural commissioner. "I don't think problems are an indication of more contamination but more access to raw products."

Robinson Farm in Hardwick, the largest provider of raw milk to Just Dairy, was a conventional dairy, feeding its cows grain and selling milk to a bulk processor to be pasteurized, until 2005. But then the farm's owners changed course. The farm shrank its herd from 100 to 40 cows, put all of them out to pasture, and began the transition to organic production of raw milk. (Raw milk farms are not required to grass-feed their cows, but many consider it important for quality and safety.)

Agri-Mark, a bulk milk processor with plants around New England, handles milk from 60 percent of Massachusetts' dairy farms. The company's position is that all milk should be pasteurized, said its spokesman, Douglas DiMento. "It can be very high quality, but there are organisms you can't see," he said.

But even at Agri-Mark, not everyone agrees.

Dave Patteson, a former farmer who regularly drank unpasteurized milk from his cows and is now the manager of Agri-Mark's laboratory, said it is more important to consider the source of the milk rather than whether it has been pasteurized.

"I'm a huge advocate of just knowing where your food comes from," he said.

 
How many shares of local bovine have you bought Maurile?
I don't have to buy shares. Here in California, I can get real milk right in the grocery store.
So they didn't ban raw milk in January 2008? You need to change your thread title.
They banned it, and the ban is still on the books.But they (meaning the state legislature) banned it based on lies from the dairy lobbyists. When this was pointed out to them, they agreed to un-ban it.The law un-banning it still hasn't been passed, but it should be soon. In the meantime, the ban is not being enforced. So there is still raw milk on the shelves.
 
I had no idea you could buy raw milk like that.

Learn something every day.

I worked on a dairy farm during my high school years. I can vouch that raw milk didn't kill me. Although I have no problem with regular pasteurized milk. Do sort of think it's interesting that of all the species of life, I think humans are the only ones that drink milk as an adult. :lmao: I still have friends that are dairy farmers so I'm glad of it.

J

 
How many shares of local bovine have you bought Maurile?
I don't have to buy shares. Here in California, I can get real milk right in the grocery store.
So they didn't ban raw milk in January 2008? You need to change your thread title.
They banned it, and the ban is still on the books.But they (meaning the state legislature) banned it based on lies from the dairy lobbyists. When this was pointed out to them, they agreed to un-ban it.The law un-banning it still hasn't been passed, but it should be soon. In the meantime, the ban is not being enforced. So there is still raw milk on the shelves.
Hurray for the common man. :goodposting:
 
FDA Harasses Dairy Company Employees

March 24 2008

Grand Jury Investigation is Latest Government Tactic against Raw Milk

Special FDA agents and investigators from the US Food and Drug Administration aggressively interrogated two young female employees of Organic Pastures Dairy Company, the nation’s largest raw milk producer, with questions focusing on the dairy’s interstate sales of raw colostrum and raw milk for pet food.

The surprise interrogations took place after work in their private homes on the evening of March 19, just hours after Judge Tobias of the Hollister Superior Court issued a temporary restraining order against the California Department of Food and Agriculture. The state court ruling blocked enforcement of California’s anti-raw milk AB 1735, which mandates unnecessarily stringent standards for beneficial coliform bacteria in raw milk. The temporary restraining order represents an important legal victory for raw milk producers and consumers in California and throughout the nation.

The federal agents threatened one employee with arrest if questions were not fully and truthfully answered about Organic Pastures’ order fulfillment practices. Her answers reflected information that is readily available at the company’s website, www.organicpastures.com. The other employee was told FDA would “make it worth her while” to “wear a wire” and record conversations with Organic Pastures president Mark McAfee. The employee refused the offer. “We are like a family, I would never do that to a family member,” she said, reflecting her close relationship with the McAfee family.

Both employees were served subpoenas to appear April 3 for a secret grand jury investigation. In 2003, Organic Pastures received a confirmation letter from Larry Childers of the FDA, which clearly stated that interstate sales of raw colostrum are not regulated because colostrum is not milk. The FDA website notes that “pet food” requires no pre-market approval and is unregulated by the FDA.

The Bronx Zoo in New York and other zoos regularly order raw colostrum and raw dairy products from Organic Pastures to save babies of endangered species and keep other animals healthy. Orders stipulate that the milk and colostrum must be raw because pasteurized versions make them ill. Many veterinarians recommend raw milk for cats and dogs.

“FDA has gone on the record as ‘hating raw milk’ in any form,” says Mark McAfee, founder and president of Organic Pastures. “The harassment of our employees and grand jury investigation is just the latest round in the government vendetta against Nature’s perfect food. If Organic Pastures is doing something illegal, all FDA needs to do is come and tell us and we will make the necessary changes to our labels and procedures.”

Organic Pastures will be represented in this action by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund. Membership in the Fund helps support the defense of raw milk and direct farm-to-consumer sales. For further information visit www.ftcldf.org.
 
Maurile, what are the percentages of botulism or other "significant" dangers in the modern production of unpasteurized milk?
If the milk is from sick cows, it's dangerous to drink it without pasteurizing it. That was a major problem in the big cities such as New York in the early 1900s. The city dairies (as opposed to rural farms) were very unhealthy environments for the cows, and the milk they produced was responsible for many human deaths.But the raw milk sold today is not from city dairies. It is from farms where cows roam free and eat grass.

Raw milk has always been available in California, and there has never been a single case of anybody ever getting sick from drinking it. (The FDA attributed four cases of disease to raw milk in 2006; but the milk in question was tested and cleared of all charges.)

Raw milk still has all the living antibodies and probiotic bacteria in it that prevent colonization by harmful bacteria. If you throw a bunch of cells of Clostridium botulinum or harmful E. coli into a glass of raw milk, they will be killed off within the next day. (Depending on how many, I guess.) If you do the same with pasteurized milk, they will proliferate and get the drinker sick.

 
Maurile, what kind of processing is done with this raw milk?J
There's no homogenizing or pasteurizing or other processing (unless you consider refrigeration to be a form of processing). It's just right from the cow.
This may or may not make any difference but purely anecdotal story here. On the dairy farm I worked on years ago, we used a very modern automatic milking setup. The dairymen would do a good job washing down the cows udders and trying to get everything as clean as possible. The milk from the cows travels straight from the udder to a large refrigerated holding tank. Everything is kept nearly surgically clean. Pretty much state of the art setup. The milk processing plant would send people to our dairy and take tours as they thought we were an example of how to do things right. I'd visit other dairy farms and we always had the cleanest operation in the area.Every few days, the dairy processing plant would send a tanker truck to the dairy and we'd empty the milk from our refrigerated holding tank into the big tanker truck.And no matter how clean we kept things with the cows and the hoses and the equipment, there was always at least a big handful of cow manure at the bottom of the holding tank. You just couldn't help it. Most of it came I figured from the cows udders not being totally clean.I'm not a germophobe. But that was kind of uncool I thought and I was glad the milk was pasteurized.Just for what it's worth.J
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And no matter how clean we kept things with the cows and the hoses and the equipment, there was always at least a big handful of cow manure at the bottom of the holding tank. You just couldn't help it. Most of it came I figured from the cows udders not being totally clean.

I'm not a germophobe. But that was kind of uncool I thought and I was glad the milk was pasteurized.
Not that I would ever want to consume manure. :lmao: But the Organic Pastures website says that, not only has there never been a single human pathogen found in any of their milk (despite quite rigorous testing), but even the cows' manure is free from salmonella. (Unlike that of conventionally raised cows.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile, what are the percentages of botulism or other "significant" dangers in the modern production of unpasteurized milk?
If the milk is from sick cows, it's dangerous to drink it without pasteurizing it. That was a major problem in the big cities such as New York in the early 1900s. The city dairies (as opposed to rural farms) were very unhealthy environments for the cows, and the milk they produced was responsible for many human deaths.But the raw milk sold today is not from city dairies. It is from farms where cows roam free and eat grass.

Raw milk has always been available in California, and there has never been a single case of anybody ever getting sick from drinking it. (The FDA attributed four cases of disease to raw milk in 2006; but the milk in question was tested and cleared of all charges.)

Raw milk still has all the living antibodies and probiotic bacteria in it that prevent colonization by harmful bacteria. If you throw a bunch of cells of Clostridium botulinum or harmful E. coli into a glass of raw milk, they will be killed off within the next day. (Depending on how many, I guess.) If you do the same with pasteurized milk, they will proliferate and get the drinker sick.
It sure looks like you're it's highly unlikely that any widespread tainting of this milk would occur then. Is that your claim?What sort of scientific studies (journal articles preferred) have been done on the statistical analysis of unpasteurized milk? If none, why not?

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Joe Bryant said:
And no matter how clean we kept things with the cows and the hoses and the equipment, there was always at least a big handful of cow manure at the bottom of the holding tank. You just couldn't help it. Most of it came I figured from the cows udders not being totally clean.

I'm not a germophobe. But that was kind of uncool I thought and I was glad the milk was pasteurized.
Not that I would ever want to consume manure. :lmao: But the Organic Pastures website says that, not only has there never been a single human pathogen found in any of their milk (despite quite rigorous testing), but even the cows' manure is free from salmonella. (Unlike that of conventionally raised cows.)
Cool. Proof is in the reality anyways and people would be getting sick I'm sure if it were a problem. I just remember always being surprised to see that in there when we emptied the tank.On a tangent, it's a fascinating business running a dairy. One huge area I loved was charting the milk production. People think cows are dumb and granted, they're not very trainable for the most part but it was interesting to me to see how they would "give" milk based on things like how the dairymen treated them. We had one guy that made a lot of racket and would yell at the cows and seemed kind of mean. On the shifts he worked, the cows would never give as much milk as they would for the dairymen we had that were more kind and gentle with the cows. You could see the cows get agitated and stressed and it really would affect their milk production.

Diet was a huge part of it too. It was a good lesson in economics for a kid like me as you always fought the balance of being able to increase milk production with adding more expensive feed to the diet. Would the extra cost for feed pay out in increased milk production? That kind of thing.

Interesting stuff for a young person.

J

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Joe Bryant said:
And no matter how clean we kept things with the cows and the hoses and the equipment, there was always at least a big handful of cow manure at the bottom of the holding tank. You just couldn't help it. Most of it came I figured from the cows udders not being totally clean.

I'm not a germophobe. But that was kind of uncool I thought and I was glad the milk was pasteurized.
Not that I would ever want to consume manure. :lmao: But the Organic Pastures website says that, not only has there never been a single human pathogen found in any of their milk (despite quite rigorous testing), but even the cows' manure is free from salmonella. (Unlike that of conventionally raised cows.)
Cool. Proof is in the reality anyways and people would be getting sick I'm sure if it were a problem. I just remember always being surprised to see that in there when we emptied the tank.On a tangent, it's a fascinating business running a dairy. One huge area I loved was charting the milk production. People think cows are dumb and granted, they're not very trainable for the most part but it was interesting to me to see how they would "give" milk based on things like how the dairymen treated them. We had one guy that made a lot of racket and would yell at the cows and seemed kind of mean. On the shifts he worked, the cows would never give as much milk as they would for the dairymen we had that were more kind and gentle with the cows. You could see the cows get agitated and stressed and it really would affect their milk production.

Diet was a huge part of it too. It was a good lesson in economics for a kid like me as you always fought the balance of being able to increase milk production with adding more expensive feed to the diet. Would the extra cost for feed pay out in increased milk production? That kind of thing.

Interesting stuff for a young person.

J
Indeed. Sounds like a great experience.I just noticed that the website also says that their cows have "naturally clean udders" because of the clean pasture environment (in contrast to feedlots where animals eat out of a trough). So maybe that cuts down on the manure remnants?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Joe Bryant said:
And no matter how clean we kept things with the cows and the hoses and the equipment, there was always at least a big handful of cow manure at the bottom of the holding tank. You just couldn't help it. Most of it came I figured from the cows udders not being totally clean.

I'm not a germophobe. But that was kind of uncool I thought and I was glad the milk was pasteurized.
Not that I would ever want to consume manure. :lmao: But the Organic Pastures website says that, not only has there never been a single human pathogen found in any of their milk (despite quite rigorous testing), but even the cows' manure is free from salmonella. (Unlike that of conventionally raised cows.)
Cool. Proof is in the reality anyways and people would be getting sick I'm sure if it were a problem. I just remember always being surprised to see that in there when we emptied the tank.On a tangent, it's a fascinating business running a dairy. One huge area I loved was charting the milk production. People think cows are dumb and granted, they're not very trainable for the most part but it was interesting to me to see how they would "give" milk based on things like how the dairymen treated them. We had one guy that made a lot of racket and would yell at the cows and seemed kind of mean. On the shifts he worked, the cows would never give as much milk as they would for the dairymen we had that were more kind and gentle with the cows. You could see the cows get agitated and stressed and it really would affect their milk production.

Diet was a huge part of it too. It was a good lesson in economics for a kid like me as you always fought the balance of being able to increase milk production with adding more expensive feed to the diet. Would the extra cost for feed pay out in increased milk production? That kind of thing.

Interesting stuff for a young person.

J
Indeed. Sounds like a great experience.I just noticed that the website also says that their cows have "naturally clean udders" because of the clean pasture environment (in contrast to feedlots where animals eat out of a trough). So maybe that cuts down on the manure remnants?
Yes, the cows being in a pasture vs a feed lot would help with the manure on the udder thing. (didn't really think I'd be typing those words on our football website...)I'd be interested to see how that operation works. I wonder if they supplement the cow's diet with any additional grain and nutrients or if it's just straight grass? That would definitely lower the milk production volume if it's just straight grass I'd think. But it would of course be more natural. Are they Holstein or Jersey cows I wonder? Most big dairys run Holsteins (the black and white cows on the Chick Fil A commercials) over the brown Jersey cows but Jerseys have a better butterfat content and make a "richer" milk.

I'd forgottten I knew some stuff about cows...

J

 
I'd be interested to see how that operation works. I wonder if they supplement the cow's diet with any additional grain and nutrients or if it's just straight grass? That would definitely lower the milk production volume if it's just straight grass I'd think. But it would of course be more natural. Are they Holstein or Jersey cows I wonder? Most big dairys run Holsteins (the black and white cows on the Chick Fil A commercials) over the brown Jersey cows but Jerseys have a better butterfat content and make a "richer" milk.
The herd has Jerseys, Ayrshires, and Holsteins -- and crossbreeds between them.They are grazed purely on open pasture.

The farm uses a 20-cow mobile milking parlor that follows the cows around from pasture to pasture.

Here's an article that describes some of the mechanics of the operation. Pretty interesting article, actually.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can probably get you a 55 gallon drum of raw milk for under $100.
From the article I just linked to: "So while the average dairyman gets $9-11 per hundredweight for his milk, and the average organic dairyman $15-20, Organic Pastures gets what works out to $55-60."
 
I'd be interested to see how that operation works. I wonder if they supplement the cow's diet with any additional grain and nutrients or if it's just straight grass? That would definitely lower the milk production volume if it's just straight grass I'd think. But it would of course be more natural. Are they Holstein or Jersey cows I wonder? Most big dairys run Holsteins (the black and white cows on the Chick Fil A commercials) over the brown Jersey cows but Jerseys have a better butterfat content and make a "richer" milk.
The herd has Jerseys, Ayrshires, and Holsteins -- and crossbreeds between them.They are grazed purely on open pasture.

The farm uses a 20-cow mobile milking parlor that follows the cows around from pasture to pasture.

Here's an article that describes some of the mechanics of the operation. Pretty interesting article, actually.
Thanks MT. I've never seen a mobile unit like that. It makes sense though. Dairy cows are not very mobile. And they milk twice a day so it's not like they could afford to be too far from the milking stalls. That's why the feedlot style next to the milking barn is so efficient. When they're out in the pasture, a mobile unit like that would make sense. Interesting - thanks.J

 
Great article.I found these bits to be particularly thought-provoking:

The problem isn’t Stoker’s intelligence; it’s what he calls the “dishonesty of the market.” Advertisers promise that consumers can have the healthiest possible food from happy animals in idyllic settings at current prices. This obviously is a lie, but it’s a lie that most people accept. Although American consumers are periodically outraged by the realities of modern agriculture, they never stop demanding cheaper food. Stoker doesn’t mind playing the hand he’s been dealt. He’s good at producing cheap food. But, he acknowledged, “cheap food makes for expensive health care.”
“It’s an old story,” McAfee said. “You see it again and again in the lists of outbreaks. City kids went to the country, drank raw milk, and got sick; country kids didn’t get sick.” But, I pointed out, this explanation still implicates Organic Pastures. McAfee shook his head. “Look, if I made four kids sick, I made four kids sick. But show me the 50,000 kids I made healthy. We don’t guarantee zero risk. We aren’t worried about the .001 percent chance that someone will get sick; we are worried about the 99 percent assurance that you are going to get sick if you eat a totally sterile, anonymous, homogenous diet.”

The problem for McAfee is that the .001 percent is shocking and visible. A dying child will make people change their behavior. The diseases that might stem from a lack of bacteria are much more subtle. They come on slowly. It’s difficult to link cause and effect. Businesses that contribute to chronic disease often flourish while businesses that contribute to acute disease get shut down.
 
This blog post is really good: Nutrition 101: The One Rule To Remember…

The reason I'm linking to it here is for two comments by Anna. All of her comments on that page are really good, but here are the two relating to milk:

Dale on November 13th, 2008 6:45 pm

To tell people that raw milk is better than pasteurized/homogenized milk is crazy. Raw milk contains bacteria that can harm people. Pasteurized/homogenized milk is the only way to be sure that the milk you drink is safe to drink. If you are drinking raw milk, at least bring the raw milk to a boil before drinking. Thank you.

----------

Anna on November 13th, 2008 8:35 pm

Dale,

If you are talking about raw milk that is produced for the pasteurized milk market, then you are right - there’s probably a good chance there’s pathogenic bacteria in the milk. Little care is taken to produce pathogen-free milk that is co-mingled in the tankers and in the bulk tanks at the processing plant because a) the farmers are paid the same for milk regardless of the “cleanliness” and their efforts and b) it is assumed the milk will be “cleaned up” later, during the cooking, standardizing, and fortification that becomes conventional milk.

By the way, pasteurized milk will not support the growth of a calf; it won’t grow properly and eventually will die. Something to think about. There are reports of people with damaged esophaguses that have lived quite well for decades on not much more than many quarts of fresh raw milk each day.

Back to the bacteria, in fact, if you check the CDC data, you’ll see far many times more illness and even death from pasteurized dairy food-borne illness outbreaks in the last 50 years than from raw milk, not to mention contaminated ground beef and many types of fruits and vegetables. Raw milk is way down on the list and not just because fewer people consume it.

One can’t just drink any raw milk, though, one must only consume raw milk that is properly produced. You can say the same thing about any food today, whether it be bagged spinach, fresh jalapenos, scallions, strawberries, etc. That pathogenic e-coli 0157:H7 that is sickening and killing people every so often is the result of acid-tolerant mutations in unhealthy and stressed feedlot cows and cattle (that eat acid-producing grains), not herds on pasture living naturally. Now that destructive e. coli pathogen is “out of the bag” so to speak, and it finds its way into the fresh fruit and produce, too.

But well-produced real milk (meant to be consumed fresh and unprocessed) from healthy animals living naturally in stress-free smaller herds, consuming pasture and alfalfa rations (instead of the unnatural grain and industrial waste that makes up most CAFO dairy rations), not to mention scrupulously clean modern stainless teat-to-tank protocols, will be milk that is pathogen-free and far healthier and easier to tolerate than conventional pasteurized milk. Yes, raw milk does have bacteria, but it is naturally healthy and beneficial lacto-bacillus bacteria that is very helpful, not harmful. Raw milk probiotic bacteria will crowd out pathogenic bacteria through competition; pasteurized milk is not sterile, actually, but with the beneficials inactivated or weakened, any surviving pathogens might multiply without competition. The dairy industry works very hard to make sure that news of conventional pasteurized milk illness outbreaks remains unknown. Reports about illness outbreaks linked to raw milk, even when small, limited or fairly mild, or unproven, are reported far and wide, in disproportionate scale.

And keep in mind that humans have consumed raw milk (from a variety of mammals, not just bovine) for at least 9,000 years and they continue to consume raw milk in many parts of the world, including here in the US through family cows, herd shares, farm sale, and retail sales (regulations and laws governing raw dairy vary by state). Pasteurized milk has only been around about 100 years (Pasteur developed the process for wine and was said to be saddened by its use on fresh milk). Pasteurization only became conventional in the last few generations (many of our grandparents can remember drinking only raw dairy during their childhood) as agriculture and food processing became more industrial.

Breast milk is raw milk, too, and the transfer of skin bacteria from mother to child play an important role in inoculating the child’s gut with beneficial bacteria that will act as part of their immune system and promote good digestion an nutrient assimilation. Raw milk does have beneficial *probiotic* bacteria, which is healthful to consume, plus the delicate enzymes are still intact, allowing for full absorption of the minerals, fats, and nutrients. Pasteurized milk no longer has intact enzyme proteins, so many people do not tolerate conventional dairy products, resulting in lactose-intolerance, inability to absorb the calcium and other minerals, etc.

It’s ironic that increasingly people pay big bucks for *probiotic* supplements and yogurt products to aid digestive problems, when real fresh milk already naturally comes with beneficial probiotics and nutrients, and without the processing, additives, and added sweeteners.

Just for the record, my family has been consuming raw milk from a small family-owned pasture-based (grass-fed) dairy in CA for the past several years (my 10 yo son consumes the most). We’ve had the healthiest two years ever in our family. My son is a strong, active boy with no cavities and a very dense bone structure (he’s quite slim but deceptively heavy when picked up). So not only why isn’t our grass-fed raw milk making us sick, but why are we not getting colds, flu, cavities, GI illness, and other common maladies?
Rob Y on November 15th, 2008 3:41 am

In regards to milk, how is pasteurization any different from cooking meat? And all homogenization dose is force the milk through a small hole at high pressure. Kind of like paint through a sprayer.

------------

Anna on November 15th, 2008 6:53 pm

Rob Y,

Good question! You got me thinking.

Yes, there is a difference in some ways, but not in others. Milk is a little different in that it is fluid and the proteins are suspended in liquid rather than in solid form, so one can’t tell if they’ve stiffened up from damage, like we can with poorly cooked meat.

Just like with milk, the wrong treatment *can* ruin meat. I, and many others, like the tender meat cuts seared on the outside but still quite rare on the inside for the best flavor, tenderness, and nutrition/digestibility. Overcooking ruins a good steak, drying it out, and potentially rendering it inedible. Basically, the proteins are completely denatured in an overcooked steak. Many people who grew up on well-done, overcooked dry meat and hated it, never learn that properly cooked rare or medium-rare steak is a pleasure to eat and digests easily.

On the flip side, “tough” cuts from well-worked muscles do very well with long, slow cooking, to break apart the collagen fibers so that the meat falls apart. Cook a tough cut over heat too high and too fast and you’ll have an awful hunk of tough, chewy meat.

A modern way around the long slow cooking of tough cuts in both homes and food factories is to pressure cook (though I don’t use a pressure cooker, probably for obvious reasons). Industrial-sized pressure cookers quickly cook those “heat & serve” packaged pot roasts one sees in the stores, because it’s faster - and fast makes the food cheaper for the consumer and more profitable for the processor. But aside from the lab chemicals and additives in the “heat & serve” pot roast and its plastic wrapper that cloaks the meat for weeks or longer, is the meat still as good as a roast cooked the traditional way? I doubt it, in fact I’m pretty sure of it.

Then again, some people think all meat should be consumed raw, too, as in steak tartar, etc. I’d consider that option if I trusted the source; I don’t trust conventional meat sources.

Milk needs the right care, too, or it’s not fit to consume. But how many even know traditional foods anymore, like raw milk, so how can they compare? How would one know the difference between real milk and factory milk in a side-by-side taste test? The milk boards and dairy councils have done a good job of lumping all milk together, with few differences. Traditional foods like milk are more variable, that’s a certainty, and factory foods are designed to not be variable, unless it is intentional. Factory food is nothing if not very consistent for consumers.

When I was first out on my own, I wondered why most of the cheddar in the US was dyed orange (I grew up in Upstate NY, a dairy state, where the cheddar was most often white unless it was a national brand). Then I met a cheesebroker at a party. The dye is added to cheese through most of the country to mask the variable colors, which change throughout the year or from source to source, from pale white to creamy or deep yellow, depending on the season and the rations: grass, sileage (bales of fermented alfalfa), or grain & other controlled rations. But cheddar is not ever naturally prison-jumpsuit orange, I can assure you of that. Not sure if consumers demanded standardized color for cheddar, but it is provided anyway for our “benefit”. Hmmmph, I prefer cheddar natural and undyed.

Traditionally, humans have long “processed” foods to make them more transportable (dried jerky), more nutritious, easier to digest, and to preserve the foods for later consumption. That sort of processing often results in very flavorful foods, too (aged cheese, miso, sauerkraut, beer, for example). Small scale processing generally takes natural processed in nature and controls them for our purposes, such as bacterial culturing, yeast-proofing, drying, etc. Milk won’t stay fresh and sweet very long unless it kept chilled, because the natural bacteria culture/ferment faster in warmer temps, so some variation on controlled fermentation was a natural way to transform, enhance, and store milk. The results are fresh and aged cheeses, yogurts, sweet and cultured creams, and sweet and cultured butter, as well as soured (clabbered) milk and buttermilk, etc.

When one starts using fresh, raw milk it is easy to see how humans observed, then took some control of the natural processes in dairy - leave milk out and it sours ad thickens naturally from its normal bacteria or the wild bacteria in the air. This milk is still safe to consume, but the bacteria have consumed the lactose while lactic acid increases. Leave the warm milk out longer, and it will separate into curds and whey, a sort of primitive cheese. Again, it’s still safe to consume (pasteurized milk at this point would be pretty putrid and smell foul instead of cheesy, and no one would be tempted to taste it).

Home cheesemaking is quite fun and easy. The less processed the milk is, the better the cheese results. Ultra-pasteurized or UHT milk for instance, isn’t very good for making cheese and ultra-pasteurized cream doesn’t whip nearly as well as raw or the lower temperature pasteurized. Ultra-pasteurized is packed like lower temp pasteurized milk and is sold in the cooler case in the US because that’s where consumers expect “fresh” milk to be, but until opened, it is actually shelf-stable and will keep without chilling (it Europe is usually sold in aseptic boxes on room temp-shelves, but Americans have a preference for cold milk, I guess). Pasteurized and high heat-treated milk won’t nourish a calf’s growth because of the damage and loss of critical factors (why we consume milk from another species is a different argument not addressed here). The very high rapid heat of UHT processing damages the milk protein structure too much (some suspect the damaged proteins isn’t used well by the human body any more, either). It tastes terrible, too, very “cooked” because of the Maillard browning (gee, that is very much like meat, actually), compared to fresh milk.

Most people don’t think of conventional milk as a highly processed food, but it is highly processed, in very different ways than when handled on a small scale such as at home, a farm, or in a cottage/artisan operation. Even home pasteurization on a stove is different from plant processing, just as there is a difference in what happens to egg protein when quickly heated (the proteins stiffen up) compared to the gentle, slow heat when making a custard or creme brulee (stirred constantly over a double boiler to gently heat slowly, resulting in a smooth, creamy texture).

Conventional milk is picked up in huge tankers (hope they’re clean after that last load of liquid eggs!), sloshed to dairy processing plants (places that look sort of like oil refineries but we’ll try not to hold that against them).

As an aside, it’s hard to get tours of dairy plants, unlike breweries and distilleries, Kelloggs, Jelly Belly, or Ben & Jerry’s. Wonder what they don’t want us to see? I can’t even get any stores to provide the names of dairies that make their private label milk. I wanted to know if the herds were on pasture or confined indoors and fed grain (or orange industry waste, old bakery goods, and expired candy bars! I kid you not!, but I didn’t get the chance to ask about these common dairy rations) Industrial scale cow milk herds are fed garbage, treated like machines, and they make watery, but copious amounts of milk. Nope, no grocery corporation I have asked will tell me the who supplies their bulk milk or how the herds are managed and fed, which isn’t very transparent and doesn’t inspire my trust in their milk products.

On the other hand, tours are encourage at the small farm/creamery that our milk comes from (the owner himself guided us around from the cows in the field, to the mobile milking trailer to goes to the cows in the field, to the building where butter was being made, to the bottling facility. The fluid milk is basically chilled, poured through a filter, and bottled, nothing else, unless it is being separated for cream & butter. If the creamline is especially high that season, that’s great for the consumer, none is removed.

Industrial processing controls or imitates nature, too, but above all, it seeks to make food products which maximize profit, so often that means speeding up the production process, slowing down natural biodegradation, eliminating some steps, adding other steps, scaling up production, removing components that reduce efficiency (profit), adding ingredients (that increase profit), etc. In other words, the process is manipulated in ways far removed from those that simply occur in nature or are gently coaxed with simple techniques.

Standard milk processing begins with centrifuging to separate it into liquids, fat, protein, and other milk solids. Then it is reconstituted back into a standardized product of certain percentages of fat, protein, milk solids, etc. (yup, taken apart, then put back together in a slightly different formula, like taking apart a Lego kit and making something that only resembles the original). Milk naturally has varying amounts of butterfat depending on the breed, the health, and the diet of the animal (fast growing high altitude grasses make the best butterfat, rich and deep yellow from carotenes and Vit A - think Heidi and beautiful cows, sheep, and goats in the Alps in Europe).

Butterfat, which carries the important fat soluble vitamins A, D, E, & K, is siphoned off for more profitable uses, like butter, cream, and ice cream. So whole milk isn’t really “whole”, it’s regulated to be exactly 3.5%, 2%, 1% or practically no butterfat (the fresh milk I buy is as much as 8% butterfat at times). That makes skimmed milk very profitable, as you can imagine. Skimmed milk is very watery, with little body, and looks more like “blue water” - very unappetizing, so spray-dried milk solids are added back to it to thicken and whiten it, making it appear more palatable.

Another thing to note is making sun-dried milk processing goes back a long way, to at least the Mongolians of the Kublai Kahn era (armies need portable food), but it’s a far different process than than high pressure spray-drying milk solids with heat, which oxidizes the cholesterol, which is the one form of cholesterol one should avoid. And the synthetic vitamin D2 added to fortify milk is not the same as the natural Vitamin D3 made by animals. Plus without the milk fat, the Vit D may not even be absorbed or utilized if it can’t be converted to Vitamin D3.

By the way, my fresh milk dairy does centrifuge milk for cream and butter-churning, and but it doesn’t reconstitute or adulterate the skimmed milk. They sell skimmed milk, but in far less quantity than the whole milk (real milk aficionados want the whole enchilada, not a pale, watery imitation). In the past, skimmed milk was made into cheese or fed to the chickens or hogs, which were great way to put it to good use.

Back to comparing cooking meat to pasteurizing milk - there’s a phenomenon occurs when cooking meat and during high heat pasteurization - the Maillard effect (browning), which generally enhances the taste of meat, but ruins the taste of milk. You might not see it in white milk or taste it as strongly in regular pasteurized milk , but the cooked taste is detectible to some and most noticeable in the higher temp products, like Ultra-Pasteurized and UHT. UHT (Ultra High Temperature) processed milk suffers the most from it.

In standard pasteurization the reconstituted milk is run over very hot plates at 161 degrees to quickly kill bacteria, both beneficial and potentially pathogenic (there *are* poop and pathogens in the factory bulk milk because there’s no incentive to keep it out with pasteurization). The rapid heat flash also denatures the delicate protein enzymes that make milk more digestible, enhances nutrient bioavailibility, and boost the immune system such as lactase, phosphatase, the immunoglobulins, etc. The delicate protein structures are changed and many people cannot digest or utilize damaged milk proteins well, or the damaged protein shapes trick immune systems into allergic reactions instead of strengthening immune defenses. Ultra-pasteurized and UHT utilize yet higher temps ( and more damage to the milk structure. Europeans, especially Spaniards, consume a lot of UHT milk because not needing chilling until opened, it saves on energy and refrigerator space. I don’t know how they can drink the stuff, though. Even before I ever tried raw milk, I couldn’t stand the taste and “feel” of UHT milk. My son wouldn’t touch ever finish a glass when he was younger, either. Now he drinks lots of raw milk.

In the US there isn’t much interest or money for conducting research on raw dairy foods or the health benefits. Studies in Europe show that children fed raw dairy have less asthma and allergies. A number of raw dairy consumers in the US choose raw dairy specifically to treat asthma and allergies and reduce medication necessity. Lactose intolerant people can often consume raw milk, because the lactase enzyme in the milk breaks down the lactose.

Homogenization is another assault imposed on milk; under intense pressure the milk is forced through miniscule screens, which breaks up the naturally large fat globules, which normally float on top, into very tiny globules that remain dispersed in the milk. There are theories that these tiny fat globules “leak” and pass through the GI tract before they are supposed to, causing health problems and disease, but there isn’t a lot of research on this.

It’s hard to imagine that, homogenization is totally benign. The fat globules aren’t just fat. They’re surrounded by a membrane consisting of phospholipids and proteins; these emulsifiers keep the individual globules from joining together into noticeable grains of butterfat and also protect the globules from the fat-digesting activity of enzymes found in the fluid portion of the milk.

Furthermore, homogenization serves no purpose whatsoever for the consumer (it isn’t hard to give a milk jug a quick shake before pouring - as long as the cap is on securely - my 4th grader’s been managing it a few years), but hiding the cream content does give an advantage to the dairy processor (back when milk was sold in glass bottles by small local farms and dairies, consumers could see which milk had the most cream and if it was very plentiful with a creamy color, or pale and skimpy). Cream was considered important then.

That’s probably more than anyone wants to know about milk. I won’t argue that anyone *must* consume dairy foods, but if one is going to, then it’s worth knowing what that’s been done to that factory milk in between the farm and the store. Factory milk pales in comparison to fresh, real milk in every way, except in cost; factory milk does have a huge price advantage. But I choose to pay more for the real deal that I can trust.
 
I used raw milk to make egg nog this past xmas, thinking of this thread. It was delish, but I'm pretty sure the bourbon / brandy / rum mixture I added to it killed any health benefit.

 
Glad to see this thread bumped. I have yet to try raw milk, but I remain intrigued. At the very least, people should be free to consume what they want without the Nanny State dictating what is verboten.

 
What's in raw milk¢ According to the Campaign for Real Milk, a US-based organisation, raw milk contains 10 per cent more B vitamins and 25 per cent more vitamin C.¢ Raw milk is rich in CLA, a "superfat" that helps promote weight loss and is alleged to have anti-cancer properties.¢ Unlike pasteurised milk, raw milk contains the enzyme lactase, which breaks down the milk-sugar lactose. This means that it can be drunk by people who are lactose-intolerant.¢ Raw milk generally contains more omega-3 fats, and as they're not corrupted by heat treatment, they're better for you.¢ It's a rich source of probiotic bacteria, which boost immunity and aid digestion.¢ It may be richer in nutrients and vitamins overall, as animals are grass-fed and kept to high standards. As many producers are organic, the milk is more likely to be free of growth hormones and antibiotics.
sold
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top