UNSAFE OR THE REAL DEAL?: Raw milk has a loyal following, but the unpasteurized product is also linked to illnesses contracted from bacteria that may lurk in milk that comes straight from a cow or goat.
Image: IMAGE COURTESY OF CHIOT'S RUN, VIA FLICKR.COM
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Milk is well known as a great dietary source of protein and calcium, not to mention an indispensable companion to cookies. But "nature's perfect food," a label given to milk over time by a variety of boosters, including consumer activists, government nutritionists and the American Dairy Council, has become a great source of controversy, too. The long-running dispute over whether milk, both from cows and goats, should be consumed in raw or pasteurized form—an argument more than a century old—has heated up in the last five years, according to Bill Marler, a Washington State lawyer who takes raw milk and other food poisoning cases.
A bumper crop of recent illness related to raw milk accentuates the problem. Last month, at least 30 people, including two children, tested positive for strains of campylobacter and Escherichia coli bacteria traced to raw (nonpasteurized) goat milk. In June five people in Minnesota were diagnosed with E. coli traced to raw cow's milk from a local dairy. One, a toddler, was hospitalized after he developed hemolytic uremic syndrome, a type of kidney failure that is a potentially deadly E. coli complication.
They are hardly isolated cases. In fact, there have already been more reports of raw milk-related illness outbreaks this year in the U.S. than in any of the past five years.
Such outbreaks are largely preventable if milk is pasteurized, says Robert Tauxe, deputy director of the Division of Foodborne, Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The process (known as high temperature, short time (HTST) pasteurization) was invented more than a century ago and relies on heat at least 72 degrees Celsius for 15 seconds to kill the stew of E. coli, campylobacter, Listeria, salmonella and other microbes that may lurk in milk that comes straight from a cow or goat. Medical experts consider pasteurization as one of the major breakthroughs in public health history. "A triumph," Tauxe adds.
Keeping it real
Raw milk proponents, including The Weston A. Price Foundation, deny its dangers and praise its superior flavor. They believe raw milk obtained from healthy, pasture-fed animals strengthens the immune system in a manner similar to human breast milk and that it cures digestive tract conditions such as Crohn's disease. Sally Fallon Morell, the foundation's president and founder of the Campaign for Real Milk, disputes the claims of raw milk-related illness. "We have analyzed those reports, and 95 percent should go in the trash can because they're biased," she says. "The pasteurization argument is based on 40-year-old science."
Raw milk advocates also claim that pasteurization destroys key nutrients. "Real milk contains a complex system of enzymes, fats, carbohydrates and fragile proteins that are wonders of the microscopic world," Fallon Morell says. "They are destroyed with rapid heating."
That assertion is debatable. As with any cooking process, pasteurization causes some chemical change, says Jennifer Nelson, a nutritionist with the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., although she says that nutrition researchers are still testing to see if nutrients, enzymes and other health-related components are significantly altered. Whatever the nutritional change, Nelson cautions, "Raw milk can carry pathogens that can cause illness and death." Certain high risk groups should never drink raw milk: infants, growing children, the elderly and people who are immune compromised because their immune systems may not be strong enough to fight off the pathogens often found in raw milk, she adds.
Given the number of disease outbreaks related to raw milk, one might expect the demand for raw milk to dry up. Not so—in fact, demand for raw milk has risen faster than cream in a milk bottle, commanding prices as high as $10 per gallon. Despite the warnings of public health officials, including the Web site Real Raw Milk Facts, raw milk has become a national cause célèbre, and dairymen who sell it have become local folk heroes.
"It's a political issue," Fallon Morell says. "It's also a health, small farm and economic issue. I'm not advocating that we all go back and live on farms, but the pendulum has gone too far in the direction of industry. What we need [are] small farms with Space Age technology."
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
52 Comments
Add CommentI'm always baffled by these types of stories. If someone wants to drink raw milk let them. If they get sick they get sick. If they become healthier they become healthier. I understand the risks and I will continue to drink pasteurized milk but if someone else wants to drink raw milk - let them. Why is this a big deal?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@kbcottre because:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. Other people have to deal with them when they get ill - and in some cases pay for their healthcare.
2. In some cases people aren't simply exercising personal choice: They're giving raw milk to young children, who don't get to take risks with their health - and perhaps don't even know what the risks are.
@rikkus:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBoth 1 and 2 apply to hundreds if not thousands of activities that we all do on a daily basis. Should we outlaw raw meat, raw vegetables, raw eggs? Tobacco, alcohol, aspirin? Bicycles, trampolines, swimming pools? All of these can cause illness or injury. All of these are experienced by children who don't know the risks.
@kbcottre Certain raw meats and properly prepared raw vegetables don't have strong risks associated with them. Raw eggs, tobacco, alcohol and aspirin do, agreed. But generally people are aware of the risks and don't give these substances to toddlers. Of course we shouldn't ban everything that people _might_ abuse, but in this case idiots are feeding this stuff to children and there doesn't seem to be an alternative if we want to protect them. Do you have a better suggestion?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@kbcottre because:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this3. as the aricle states infections from raw milk could be passed to others. Please read the article before you comment.
That said it seems to me that the industrialization of the food industry is far worse than anything happening to foodies and other raw milk advocates. We recently saw a recall of half a billion eggs from a large industrial producer but this article on raw milk mentions a very small number of cases.
The people buying raw milk are typically going to much more educated about the food they eat and will typically know the farmer and understand the risks of both processes; those used by their supplier as well as those used by the industrial supplier.
It is unfortunate that this article is so poorly written that no effort was made to analyze the health benefits suggested by raw milk advocates or the risks and costs of pasturized milk as suggested by the raw milk advocates.
Please leave my raw milk, raw milk cheese, prosciutto, salad, fish, foie gras, and pate alone. If you can't handle a few E. Coli in your food, because you are gorging yourself on antibiotics, antihistamines, antioxidants and other food preservatives, then you can't handle life.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAll of that BS about keeping everything we touch, eat and drink germless is breeding stronger bugs, and weaker humans. I don't intend to help my children head toward an evolutionary dead end, thank you.
A round of Microbiology 101 for all please:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMorningland Dairy of Mountain View, Mo., is recalling 68,957 pounds of raw milk cheese because it may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogene or Staphylococcus aureus. No illnesses have been reported. Nine varieties of Morningland Dairy raw cow milk cheese and seven varieties of Ozark Hill Farms raw goat milk cheese being recalled are packaged in vacuum-sealed plastic packages and sold nationwide. Details: by phone at 417-469-3817.
@Whup: "We recently saw a recall of half a billion eggs from a large industrial producer but this article on raw milk mentions a very small number of cases."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat could this statement mean? Are comparing a recall to cases of sickness (they are entirely different things)? Are you comparing the number of cases of sickness from tainted eggs (eaten by hundreds of missions of people) to the number of cases of sickness from raw milk (drunk by thousands)? Seriously. Is this just an incoherent rant?
@ylandrin: "If you can't handle a few E. Coli in your food, because you are gorging yourself on antibiotics, antihistamines, antioxidants and other food preservatives, then you can't handle life."
Not one of your three examples (antibiotics, antihistamines, antioxidants) are food preservatives. What are you trying to say? You are afraid of man-made compounds (for the first two) and naturally ocurring compounds (antioxidants)? Do you truly believe someone can 'handle' E. Coli through repeated exposure or just attitude? You may want to brush up on basic human physiology before commenting.
@Whup:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this3. as the aricle states infections from raw milk could be passed to others.
Millions of school children are starting back to school now - millions of infections are going to be passed to others. A lot of kids will get sick, some may even die. This is normal. This is life.
The entire population of the United States has ready access to pasteurized milk. A tiny percentage of this population wants to drink raw milk. A tiny percentage of this group will get sick. An even tinier percentage will pass on their infection. This is a non-problem. Let them drink milk.
@Whup:
3. ...Please read the article before you comment.
Please don't comment on things you know nothing about.
@rikkus:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this>But generally people are aware of the risks and don't give these substances to toddlers.
- Generally people don't give raw milk to toddlers. Even if this were legal very few people would do it.
>but in this case idiots are feeding this stuff to children
- Idiots also lock their children in basements for years, get them drunk because they think it's funny, and abuse them in the most horrific ways. The problem is not raw milk - the problem is the idiots.
>and there doesn't seem to be an alternative if we want to protect them. Do you have a better suggestion?
- Sure - if you like to drink raw milk ask people in the raw milk community where the best local raw milk is and buy from there. Ask the dairy to verify that their milk is not infected. If it ever makes you sick notify the raw milk community and the dairy and take your business to a more reliable farm. Or get your milk from the grocery store.
Most people don't want to get sick and don't want to make their children sick. Most dairies don't want to sell milk that will make their customers sick. Buy local. Get to know your farmer.
The factual basis of this article is so low, it is an embarrassment to a magazine with "Science" in its title. It fails to mention: 1.) that biological tests are now so cheap that raw milk dairymen can and do provide bio test results for their milk to the consumer to show its fit to drink; 2.) that raw milk has a variety of health benefits that are well proven in lab animals and annecdotally supported by many people. For example, some lactose intolerant people can drink raw milk without problems. Many other health benefits are open to factual discussion, but none of them are mentioned. The article leaves the impression that people drink raw milk for "freedom", and maybe better taste.; 3.) the extensive information that the Weston Price Foundation has about the benefits of raw milk versus processed milk. WPF is mentioned in passing, but its viewpoint on relevant facts about raw milk is completely missing from the article. 4.) the facts about false conclusions blaming raw milk for illness that it did not or may not have caused. The article brings up this topic, but provides no case examples, statistics, or information sources about this important blame game that surrounds raw milk. Where are the facts? Where's the science? 5.) that grass-fed raw milk brings yet another dimension to the biology at work in this topic. The article is completely blind to the biology and chemistry of grass-fed raw milk, as well as the additional science that needs to be investigated in this area.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn addition to missing all the above factual and scientific discussion, the article veers off into alternative treatments. With raw milk consumption growing at over 15% per year, one of the fastest in the food industry, one might wonder who cares about alternative treatments since the interest evidently is in raw milk. That whole section is a diversion from the central issues of 1. benefits of raw milk, and 2. consumer access to quality raw milk.
This article started with a bias and ended with a bias. It is not science reporting, nor even balanced factual reporting.
@lamorpa
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am indeed afraid, very much so, of man-made compounds. Antibiotics and antihistamines are, and indeed weaken your immune system. While they may be useful, in selected cases, their abuse to "treat" benign cases of infections and allergies (respectively) is causing much worse effects than the minor inconveniences they were supposed to treat.
Antioxidants (vinegar, ascorbic acid, tartaric acid) are in fact food preservatives, used to preserve the taste and color of most canned foods. Although they are natural compounds, they are not "naturally occurring" at the concentrations at which they are used in that function.
And while some of those food additives can have nutritional value, their abuse interferes notably with the intestinal flora, reducing its diversity and capacity to fulfill its two primary functions: serve as first line of defense against food pathogens, and help assimilate nutrients.
As for "handling" E. Coli through repeated exposure, yes, I do believe you can. In fact, this is just how vaccines work. Your immune system learns to detect, and contain, harmful pathogens by being exposed to them, not by living in a sterile environment. Jenner's ideas were probably qualified as "incoherent rant" too in his time, so I am in good company.
@Whup: "It is unfortunate that this article is so poorly written that no effort was made to analyze the health benefits suggested by raw milk advocates"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe completely scientifically unsupportable 'evidence' on the benefits of raw milk have been analyzed. There was nothing to publish. It's all crunchy-granola anti-establishment nonsense in the usual categories: "it's natural" (whatever that clinically means), "helps the immune system" (a standard immesurable feel-good generality), etc. It goes on and on...
@laird: "that raw milk has a variety of health benefits that are ... annecdotally supported by many people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMeaning there is no actual evidence, only people's personal(irrelevant for scientific purposes), unsupported, non-reproducible biases.
@laird: "For example, some lactose intolerant people can drink raw milk without problems."
Meaning they were actually not lactose intolerant in the first place, only incorrectly believing it, for some unknown reason.
I know for a fact of a case of someone that drink raw milk and then is upset because the healthcare system can not treat his multiple chemical sensitivities and severe allergies. There is lot of research coming out about the loss of certain immune cells called Tregs that may influence airway disease,allergies, intestinal inflammation, etc. and propose MCS is from the same. For those that believe that non-pasteurized milk is better for a person then someone is doing a really good sell.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ylandrin:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"...Antibiotics and antihistamines are, and indeed weaken your immune system."
Nope. Not according to any controlled study.
"As for "handling" E. Coli through repeated exposure, yes, I do believe you can."
I believe you believe it, but it is simply not clinically true.
"In fact, this is just how vaccines work."
Nope.
As I see the situation there are several reasons why more people are eating raw milk. 1. They believe it to be better. 2 they have become anti science interference in there food consumption, no GMO's no vaccines, nothing and it crosses both political spectrums, there is an excellent article about this at http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_3_american-liberalism.html and finally 4.The government has made so many laws with many of them having been shown to have no real purpose that people no longer believe what the government says about what is or is not good for you.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@lamorpa
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou should have read this before replying: http://www.drlwilson.com/articles/antibiotics.htm
This is by no ways a scientific study, but is simply explained, and something you should be able to understand.
Or maybe you could try to delve into real scientific literature:
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091202/full/462558a.html
http://www.nature.com/mi/journal/v3/n2/full/mi2009135a.html
http://www.nature.com/ni/journal/v8/n11/full/ni1526.html
Note that the site Real Raw Milk Facts cited in this article (or should I say in this light, piece of propaganda?) is NOT from any health official, but from Outbreak Inc., litigation consultants for the food industry. What is their legitimacy there? Are they scientists, doctors, do they even know what they are talking about besides the legal implications? I doubt it. In retrospect, maybe the dearth of scientific references in this article should have hinted as to its status...
Our family is fortunate to have access to several dairy farms which are certified by the state to sell raw milk. On occasion, the farms will not sell the milk because it has tested positive for e coli. We've been consuming raw milk for several years without any ill effects. I'm surprised that this article doesn't mention that certified dairy farms must rigorously test their product before it is sold to the public. I prefer this method of safety control over pasteurization.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ylandrin:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour first reference (www.drlwilson.com/articles/antibiotics.htm), "BEYOND ANTIBIOTICS" is an exceptional example of unscientific nonsense. From 'amazing' revelations such as 'antibiotics are not useful agains viral infections' (as though every intelligent person does not know this?) and 'antibiotics can case allergic reactions' (same), to suggestions of using echinacea (completely discedited) and Colloidal Silver (discredited and dangerous). I stopped read at 'Coffee Enemas.' I think I can dismiss this article out of hand.
I like http://www.nature.com/mi/journal/v3/n2/full/mi2009135a.html though. Definite read.
Good point about Outbreak Inc. Nothing like having a vested interest. That's SciAm's fault.
@ylandrin: That's not how vaccinations work. First of all, they only apply to VIRUSES, not bacteria. The two are completely different--viruses aren't even technically a living organism, just a collection of genetic material used to alter living cells to a different purpose. You can not gain immunity to bacteria from exposure. That's not how things work.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for raw milk, ew? I mean, it's already been shown that all humans are at least a little bit lactose intolerant, and that drinking it past infancy isn't really beneficial.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'll agree that antibiotics get over-prescribed (though that's more a fault of our current have-insurance-get-serviced healthcare system in concert with big Pharma). Using myself as an example, I once came down with Colitis as a result of the medicine I was given to handle an infection in my face, following the removal of my wisdom teeth.
But where's the problem that's causing people to flock back to un-pasteurized milk? I mean, it's being shown that you can and will get sick eventually from drinking it raw, which is why the process of pasteurization was sought for and introduced in the fist place. How many people are suffering from the consequences of pasteurization? Are there any hard cases where it's been shown to cause problems, or is this more of an anecdotal thing, where people just FEEL like it's not healthy? Because it's looking like the latter, from the lack of any real evidence.
Keep in mind, it's easier to convince people of complete falsehoods nowadays, what with the interwebs and all. I give you Obama is a secret muslim/rascist/nazi-fascist-commie.
@stew6302: I notice that milk seems somewhat out of place there. It sounds like you're describing the four horsemen of the apocalypse, but I didn't know there was a fifth representing milk. Learn something new everyday. :P
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn all seriousness, what so many people are saying is the end of days seems to really just be a transition to the Age of Aquarius:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Aquarius
Why don't they just go out in a field and grab a big old cowpie and eat it,or maybe give a cow's rectum a big o smooch?Then they can remove all doubt about consuming some e-coli.Those poor little children that have no choice in this matter.Will the parents whose kids die be charged with child abuse?Don't get me wrong I grew up milking cows and goats,but most of these people wouldn't know a teat from a cell phone tower and are only in it to be part of the in crowd.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@Jager25 Oh so... if vaccination only applies to viruses, what about BCG, and other vaccines against tuberculosis? As in, Mycobacterium Tuberculosis? Not a virus I think?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut I fear we are getting far off track... which was, repeated exposure to pathogens builds up immunity to them. Including E. Coli, a naturally abundant bacteria that we are bound to encounter sooner or later in our environment, if not through milk then something else. So leave milk alone, will you.
Everyone should appreciate the White Snakeroot plant this time of year(ageratina altissima); it blooms from August to September in eastern North America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUnfortunately it is a very toxic plant, is frequently eaten by cattle, which then transfer the toxin to the meat and milk. Throughout colonial North American history it was the leading cause of death from milk sickness. Abraham Lincoln's mother was the most famous victim.
Nowadays industrial dairy plants mix milk batches from a large number of farms, therefore the toxicity is greatly reduced.
I'm disappointed to find an article like this in a publication that I've so long respected. You site many government sources saying that raw milk is dangerous & pasturization safe. These are the same folks that are telling us that GMO foods are safe, while the European nations have banned them. When Japan banned GMO foods, they stated that they'd wait to see what effect GMO crops had on America's children. I'm sure you think it's wonderful that the US Government is using our children as lab rats, in a large experiment, so the Japanese can know GMO crops are safe. I find no comfort in that, and I take that example to heart anytime I here these same people speak on any subject related to my families health.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe picture you show in your article says it all to me. You are talking about milk, yet you show a picture of cream being seperated. All one has to do is look at the jars & the seperation can be seen. The cream is on the top, the milky-blue 'skim' milk on the bottom. They both have to do with milk, to be sure. But, your picture is not representitive of your subject, of drinking raw, whole milk. Your article is not about seperating cream, to make butter, or for coffee. First, I know of no one who would have every jar in the project open. There are far too many 'bugs' floating around in the air. If this is how the folks you talked to treat milk, no wonder they got sick!!!
The government sponsered demise of the Small Amercian Family Farm is dispicable. I am extremely disappointed that Scientific American would participate in such a scheme!
"If a child comes to a day care center with E. coli, it can be passed to your child, spread through feces in diapers."
My child would never go to a day care center where feces from diapers is shared!!! Child warehouses that would spread such filth are where your efforst should be focused. WASH YOUR HANDS PEOPLE!!!! As a nurse, I handled plenty of this type of material, in a far more serious setting. NEVER did I spread any of it! Washing one's hands is a very simple thing to do! This is the type of hysterical hype that shows sensetionalism in reporting. Statements are made that the general public doesn't ever think to question, but is given angnst by. How rediculous!!!
If you want a real story. Go take a secret look at a USDA inspected meat processing facility! Don't tell them you're coming... so they can clean up thier act. Look at the lack of humane treatment, the contamination of the meat. How can a facility process thousands of animals a day & take anI'm disappointed to find an article like this in a publication that I've so long respected. You site many government sources saying that raw milk is dangerous & pasteurization safe. These are the same folks that are telling us that GMO foods are safe, while the European nations have banned them. When Japan banned GMO foods, they stated that they'd wait to see what effect GMO crops had on America's children. I'm sure you think it's wonderful that the US Government is using our children as lab rats, in a large experiment, so the Japanese can know GMO crops are safe. I find no comfort in that, and I take that example to heart anytime I here these same people speak on any subject related to my families health.
The picture you show in your article says it all to me. You are talking about milk, yet you show a picture of cream being separated. All one has to do is look at the jars & the separation can be seen. The cream is on the top, the milky-blue 'skim' milk on the bottom. They both have to do with milk, to be sure. But, your picture is not representative of your subject, of drinking raw, whole milk. Your article is not about separating cream, to make butter, or for coffee. First, I know of no one who would have every jar in the project open. There are far too many 'bugs' floating around in the air. If this is how the folks you talked to treat milk, no wonder they got sick!!!
The government sponsored demise of the Small American Family Farm is despicable. I am extremely disappointed that Scientific American would participate in such a scheme!
"If a child comes to a day care center with E. coli, it can be passed to your child, spread through feces in diapers."
My child would never go to a day care center where feces from diapers is shared!!! Child warehouses that would spread such filth are where your efforts should be focused. WASH YOUR HANDS PEOPLE!!!! As a nurse, I handled plenty of this type of material, in a far more serious setting. NEVER did I spread any of it! Washing one's hands is a very simple thing to do! This is the type of hysterical hype that shows sensationalism in reporting. Statements are made that the general public doesn't ever think to question, but is given angst by. How ridiculous!!!
If you want a real story. Go take a secret look at a USDA inspected meat processing facility! Don't tell them you're coming... so they can clean up their act. Look at the lack of humane treatment, the contamination of the meat. How can a facility process thousands of animals a day & take any kind of care in doing so? Now.... THERE's a story!!!
I'm disappointed to find an article like this in a publication that I've so long respected. You site many government sources saying that raw milk is dangerous & pasteurization safe. These are the same folks that are telling us that GMO foods are safe, while the European nations have banned them. When Japan banned GMO foods, they stated that they'd wait to see what effect GMO crops had on America's children. I'm sure you think it's wonderful that the US Government is using our children as lab rats, in a large experiment, so the Japanese can know GMO crops are safe. I find no comfort in that, and I take that example to heart anytime I here these same people speak on any subject related to my families health.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe picture you show in your article says it all to me. You are talking about milk, yet you show a picture of cream being separated. All one has to do is look at the jars & the separation can be seen. The cream is on the top, the milky-blue 'skim' milk on the bottom. They both have to do with milk, to be sure. But, your picture is not representative of your subject, of drinking raw, whole milk. Your article is not about separating cream, to make butter, or for coffee. First, I know of no one who would have every jar in the project open. There are far too many 'bugs' floating around in the air. If this is how the folks you talked to treat milk, no wonder they got sick!!!
The government sponsored demise of the Small American Family Farm is despicable. I am extremely disappointed that Scientific American would participate in such a scheme!
"If a child comes to a day care center with E. coli, it can be passed to your child, spread through feces in diapers."
My child would never go to a day care center where feces from diapers is shared!!! Child warehouses that would spread such filth are where your efforts should be focused. WASH YOUR HANDS PEOPLE!!!! As a nurse, I handled plenty of this type of material, in a far more serious setting. NEVER did I spread any of it! Washing one's hands is a very simple thing to do! This is the type of hysterical hype that shows sensationalism in reporting. Statements are made that the general public doesn't ever think to question, but is given angst by. How ridiculous!!!
If you want a real story. Go take a secret look at a USDA inspected meat processing facility! Don't tell them you're coming... so they can clean up their act. Look at the lack of humane treatment, the contamination of the meat. How can a facility process thousands of animals a day & take any kind of care in doing so? Now.... THERE's a story!!!
Back in 2005, When I started researching food, drugs and raw milk, according to the CDC website there were 70 million cases of food poisoning. Not one attributed to raw milk.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHad there been even one case there would have been a media circus and the news would have again, spread the fear of raw milk like it was the Black Plague's return.
Since then there have been food recalls, sickness and deaths from spinach, lettuce, peanuts, tomatoes, pastuerized milk, eggs and meat, but no raw milk.
Currently the CDC and the FDA have approved using beef exposed to cow manure in frozen burgers that have been treated with ammonia for sale and human consumption by fast food restaurants.
No problem there, just pour the ammonia in the batch of beef and mix it up, freeze and ship it out the door.
Yet they, the CDC and FDA become almost rabid at the mention of the sale of raw milk.
My conclusion is that the FDA and the CDC are run by either totally insane idiots or by sellouts to the dairy and beef industries.
The don't care about the public but do worship payoffs by the ones with the most money.
70 million cases and there is no emergency or worry, unless one case is from raw milk.
The FDA or CDC protecting the public?
Get real, it's all about the money, Honey!
To me the big issue here is one of lack of studies to back up certain claims and outright misinformation and denialism.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'd be perfectly content if rather than pass more laws about what people can and cannot consume if they'd pass laws that more strictly enforced what claims one can make about things like unpasturized milk. If advocates cannot support their claims with evidence they should be held legally accountable for illnesses caused by their pretty lies. The same should be true of groups that advocate not vaccinating children.
As the article states the decision to consume such milk or feed it to your children has the potential to affect others. As does the refusal to vaccinate (loss of herd immunity occurs when vaccination rates fall below about 90%.). Boo hoo you might say, but what about people with existing health problems who can't be vaccinated or have to use the same daycares as children potentially infected with nasty strains of bacteria from raw milk?
If you want to protect people's rights to do their own thing I won't argue against it. If they do so at the expense of others though or tell people things that aren't true that encourage dangerous behaviors they ought to be held accountable. Just as I would for yelling fire in a crowded theatre.
I am allergic to pastuerized milk. As a veterinarian, I have a couple goat farms as clients and I purchase raw goats milk from farms where I know the goats are healthy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@westcoastDiva
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyou said; "spread the fear of raw milk like it was the Black Plague's return"
Well darlin' it's here. Google Black Footed Ferret.
Bubonic Plague. The Mainstream Media doesn't give a shit. I mean the MSM doesn't give an e-coli.
i think pasteurisations procedure has fullfilled their enrichment step for nutrient so it doesnt lowering their whey proteins, vitamins compositions etc.Rather than to get them drunk by raw milk infected with E.coli, Salmonella ,Listeria which high risk death.However genetically person will showing who has the good gene for getting drunk with raw milk.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTuberculosis is another disease spread in raw milk. I know, for I have lived with scars on my lungs most of my life from it. My brother still has a scar on his neck from removal of a tubercular cyst. My aunt (deceased many years now) who lived with us, also had a cyst removed from her neck. We grew up on a farm in Ontario with 20-40 dairy cows, and in the mass inspections during the early forties, 2 of our cows had to be destroyed. Some farmers lost whole herds. It was from our two infected cows that we became infected. We were lucky because we were young and strong, and otherwise we had good food and fresh air - the only cure at that time for tuberculosis.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBecause of regular inspections and regulation, tuberculosis has been generally under control for years now. See the USDA site http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/tuberculosis/
However, it is still existant, and can rear its ugly head at any time.
If you think you must have raw milk, be certain you get it from a farm that abides by all regulations and has their cattle inspected. Just the farm down the road that has a cow or two may not be a wise supplier.
As far as taste is concerned, give me good cold pasturized milk anyday. I also grew up on the taste (varying from day to day) of raw milk - often straight from the pail as she was being milked. The taste is supplied by whatever the cow happened to be eating - it could be fresh timothy, or clover, alfalfa or timothy hay stored over the winter. Or it could be turnips, or onions, or new spring grass (which actually can have a quite strong, unpleasant taste,) or any number of delectable items she found. The taste of milk from a cow on pasture is not consistant.
Years ago, when there was no pasteurization or regulations, you just took your chance on it. The same with e-coli in meats, etc. Having raw milk and enough meat was healthier than none at all. Most of us survived - many did not. Most families considered themselves lucky if 60 percent of their children survived to adulthood. That figure today would be abhorrant.
Just because its "natural" doesn't mean it's good - tuberculosis and e-coli and cyanide are natural.
P.S. Growing up as a farm child in early-mid 1900's, in a community of dairy farms, no one I knew drank milk as a drink - no glass of milk with dinner - even for the children. That was only for the city people who had their (pasturized) milk delivered. Generally, all the milk used was used in cooking and only a little for cereal. For babies, it was always boiled and cooled - never given raw.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI hate to see misleading information like the title of this article. I wish journalists would dig some more and do their homework more completely rather than to cater to the sensationalism around this topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere is the CDC's own data:
" In a recent review of E. coli O157 infections, raw milk products accounted for 4% of outbreaks during a 20-year period"
Some more really interesting data:
"According to the cited recent CDC report, the mode (kind of food) causing illness secondary to E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks have changed in the past several years. (Note the emergence of leafy vegetables)."
(1998-2002) (2003-2007)
Beef 33 42
Leafy vegetable 11 41
Dairy 13 13
Fruits-nuts 41 2
Sprouts 1 2
Wild Game 0 1
Poultry 2 0
I don't see anyone cracking down on beef and salads - the top sources of e-coli. A few years back, even fruit & nuts topped the list. So why is dairy being targetted? Well the answer is obvious - not good for the dairy business.
Note also that "Dairy" as a category here is referring to ALL dairy - raw, pasteurized, and eggs as well.
Also the cases that are reported are still questionable. When a farm is targetted, they are subject to all kinds of harrassment and there have been cases reported in which e-coli is not traced back to them, but they are still shut down.
My conclusion about this article is, do your homework and get your facts straight!!
I hate to see misleading information like the title of this article. I wish journalists would dig some more and do their homework more completely rather than to cater to the sensationalism around this topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere is the CDC's own data:
" In a recent review of E. coli O157 infections, raw milk products accounted for 4% of outbreaks during a 20-year period"
Some more really interesting data:
"According to the cited recent CDC report, the mode (kind of food) causing illness secondary to E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks have changed in the past several years. (Note the emergence of leafy vegetables)."
(1998-2002) (2003-2007)
Beef 33 42
Leafy vegetable 11 41
Dairy 13 13
Fruits-nuts 41 2
Sprouts 1 2
Wild Game 0 1
Poultry 2 0
I don't see anyone cracking down on beef and salads - the top sources of e-coli. A few years back, even fruit & nuts topped the list. So why is dairy being targetted? Well the answer is obvious - not good for the dairy business.
Note also that "Dairy" as a category here is referring to ALL dairy - raw, pasteurized, and eggs as well.
Also the cases that are reported are still questionable. When a farm is targetted, they are subject to all kinds of harrassment and there have been cases reported in which e-coli is not traced back to them, but they are still shut down.
My conclusion about this article is, do your homework and get your facts straight!!
May I suggest that each of us be pro-active in insuring that all the foods we consume are from safe sources. I avoid any food from China since they do not have a functional version of our FDA. My dogs do not get raw hides from anywhere except the US, Canada or the EU. I have read that many SA countries add arsnic to beef hides. Keep in mind that when pesticides are banned in this country, the manufacturers send them to third world countries where the government does not monitor such things. Do you want to eat their produce?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was raised on small farms, never pasteurizing, the last one, selling raw milk to neighbors. I feel it was a strong factor in my strong immune system (or else proved I had one) and I don't recall any of our family having any related illnesses. A WWII vet claimed our milk was a major part of his recovery from a South Pacific "death march". As for the danger of others having to pay for our health care, we put too much emphasis on insurance and keeping everyone alive as long as possible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you, omsandi, for providing us with the CDC info. I wonder what the e-coli figures are for milk from certified dairy farms, such as the ones in my area. We (and many others) have been purchasing from them for years with no problems. The milk is tested before it is sold, so I feel very confident that it is safe to consume.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn easy solution would be to legalize the raw milk and cheese, but put a warning label that says that it is unpasteurized and not recommended for the very young, very old, or anyone with a compromised immune system. They do this with unpasteurized Apple Cider, which is thankfully still perfectly legal.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was raised on raw milk and I feel it, and generally living 'close to the dirt', gave me a strong immune system. Does this mean I could drink it safely now, and would it do me any more good?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisStew 6302 said: "After a great misery for mankind an even
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgreater one approaches, when the cycle
of the centuries is renewed. It will rain
blood, milk, famine, war and disease.
In the sky will be seen a fire,
dragging a tail of sparks." CII Q45
Centuries
This quote indicate a relationship between milk and mass death. This is supposed to happen at the start of the millennium.
_______
This is Nostrodomus? If so, then you do realize he used descriptive language. There is nothing to indicate "milk" meant actual milk, as opposed to a liquid falling from the sky that has the look of milk. This could be volcanic ash in rain, sometime of airborne chemical dispersant, or even some kind of spore in concentrations large enough to affect the clarity of water. There is already a red rain reported from India: it was not raining "blood" so if you want to use that as evidence of fulfilling a prophecy, then it is logical to assume the same will be true of "milk".
I agree with your overall point, but there are different types of illnesses: sometimes we are not reacting to the bacteria itself, but to a substance produced by the bacteria. This is usually what happens with seafood allergies. An exposure or two results in an intolerance rather than greater tolerance, so we become "allergic" and have dangerous reactions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI apologize that I can't remember more specifically, but I learned this from a discussion with a lab technician who was studying pathogens.
The best thing is to be educated, find a reliable source for the milk or cheese, and make sure it stays properly chilled to inhibit growth of what might be in it.
I agree with the people who argue that there is not any real extra risk to children. We take our kids to restaurants or we buy food, and we have no idea where it is from, how it was produced, what it has been in contact with, or who is preparing it. People who buy raw milk are likely much more aware of the quality of food they are giving to their children than the average person.
If there was a source for raw milk near me, I would choose it over store-bought.
My adult son has had allergies for years, and when he switched to raw goat milk, he experienced a profound and unexpected change in his symptoms for the better.
Scientific study certainly can reflect bias toward the interests of those who fund the study, so it is important to research the researchers, and it is a also good idea to read the original study.
How did the example of spreading e coli in raw milk via diapers get past SA editors?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom Todars Online Textbook of Bacteriology:
"The GI tract of most warm-blooded animals is colonized by E. coli within� hours or a few days after birth. The bacterium is ingested in foods or water or obtained directly from other individuals handling the infant. The human bowel is usually colonized within 40 hours of birth."
If a day care center is spreading e coli from diapers, it's a filthy day care center, not a problem with milk.
rikkus,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDo you have the same complaint about someone having to pay for the health care of the obese Twinkie and Dorito eating crowd (which is subsidized by our tax dollars to begin with!)? Do you complain about paying for those made sick from eating factory farmed food? Who paid for all of those folks who ate the salmonella eggs. Do you realize that there are vastly more illnesses from pasteurized milk each year? And who's paying for that? I think your complaint wasn't well thought out.
Do you have the same complaint about someone having to pay for the health care of the obese Twinkie and Dorito eating crowd (which is subsidized by our tax dollars to begin with!)? Do you complain about paying for those made sick from eating factory farmed food? Who is paying for all those folks who ate the millions of salmonella eggs. Do you realize that there are vastly more illnesses from pasteurized milk each year? And who's paying for that?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think your complaint wasn't well thought out.
@ylandrin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell said!
I would like to nail this down real good here so there is no doubt about just how wrong the FDA is. Vonderplanitz and Campbell Douglass’s testimony on Raw Milk, this is probably the best reference for anyone who wants the truth about Raw vs Pasteurized Milk so they can make up their own minds using the scientific facts. Below are just two interesting tidbits from this report that drives a stake right where it belongs between the eyes of the FDA.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThroughout USA, for nearly 40 years, millions of people drank over 3 billion glasses of Alta Dena Dairy’s raw milk and there was not one epidemic, and not one proved case of foodborne illness because of it (Exhibit K, p. 58).
Some Outbreaks Attributed to Bacterial Food-poisoning from PASTEURIZED MILK..16
• 1945?1,492 cases for the year in the U.S.A.
• 1945?1 outbreak, 300 cases in Phoenix, Arizona.
• 1945?Several outbreaks, 468 cases of gastroenteritis, 9 deaths, in Great Bend, Kansas.
• 1978?1 outbreak, 68 cases in Arizona.
• 1982?over 17,000 cases of yersinia enterocolitica in Memphis, Tenn.
• 1982?172 cases, with over 100 hospitalized from a three-Southern-state area.
• 1983?1 outbreak, 49 cases of listeriosis in Massachusetts.
• 1984?August, 1 outbreak S. typhimurium, approximately 200 cases, at one plant in Melrose
Park, IL.
• 1984?November, 1 outbreak S. typhimurium, at same plant in Melrose Park, IL.
• 1985?March, 1 outbreak, 16,284 confirmed cases, at same plant in Melrose Park, IL.
• 1985?197,000 cases of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella infections from one dairy in
California.1718
• 1985?1,500+ cases, Salmonella culture confirmed, in Northern Illinois.
• 1993?2 outbreaks statewide, 28 cases Salmonella infection.
• 1994?3 outbreaks, 105 cases, E. Coli & Listeria in California.
• 1995?1 outbreak, 3 cases in California.
• 1996?2 outbreaks Campylobactor and Salmonella, 48 cases in California.
• 1997?2 outbreaks, 28 cases Salmonella in California.
Take that FDA and put it where the sun does not shine.
Dr. Paul Blake, N.D.
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.” ~Thomas Jefferson
Thank you for providing more facts herbprof.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat is scary to hear about and I hope that the milk will be more carefully watched and pasteurized before it is sent to stores. I hate to see anyone get E coli especially kids. I spend most my time doing <a href="http://www.simplicitylaser.com">Laser Hair Removal Phoenix AZ</a> and so I'm no expert on the subject but I do know that E coli is nasty and no fun!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis debate recently hit close to home for my family.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisProfessionally I have intimate experience in the illness outcomes of contaminated raw milk. As already discussed contaminated raw milk is a known source of disease causing pathogens in humans. Raw milk has been implicated in causing severe illness with lasting morbidity. It is not always just a bout of mild diarrhea. The General public is naive to the risk they take with a product like raw milk. E-coli:O157 and invasive Listeria infections cause permanent neurological damage, kidney failure, infant and fetus demise, and death.
When you tell someone who understands the risks of raw milk that you have decided to give it to your family it's similar to saying you decided to let your kids play in an open field during a lighting storm. Most people have an instinctive reaction that that's not a good idea even if they don't know the risk ratio or likelihood of being struck by lighting. They know it only takes once to have a really bad outcome.
The types of pathogens than can be picked up from raw milk and cause diarrhea are easily passed person to person in a group setting. This includes among family members in the same household. This secondary transmission, of the type of pathogens that can be found in contaminated raw milk, is consistently documented among groups or families with good hand hygiene and is not a sign, necessarily, of a dirty environment or poor habits.
Electing to consume raw milk is a leap of faith and some people who do so are looking for a cure for a condition that is discouraging or difficult.
Personally, I have had to make a difficult decision on learning that a friend, which has been looking after my school age child, has recently decided to provide raw milk to her family. My child will no longer be going to her home after school. It is of course my friend’s choice and I have no bearing on her decision so it is best I am not a position to comment. I am concerned for my child’s exposure as well that of her and her family.
I am concerned that the choice of raw milk is increasing and better education needs to be provided to the public about the risks they are taking.
Signed
Public Health Professional