Raw milk can be dangerous

[rawmilkmike]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

They should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations if that is what the consumer wants. If their basic cleanliness regulations are going to double and quadruple the price they can keep them.

 

[ChrisL]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

They should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations if that is what the consumer wants. If their basic cleanliness regulations are going to double and quadruple the price they can keep them.

Thing is, a lot of people will take advantage of lax regulations when it comes to cleanliness. I'm not worried about raw milk, but of course the production facilities need to be clean. Otherwise, there could fecal matter and other such disgusting things in the milk. Also, it could be expired or any number of things.

 

[rawmilkmike]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

They should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations if that is what the consumer wants. If their basic cleanliness regulations are going to double and quadruple the price they can keep them.

Thing is, a lot of people will take advantage of lax regulations when it comes to cleanliness. I'm not worried about raw milk, but of course the production facilities need to be clean. Otherwise, there could fecal matter and other such disgusting things in the milk. Also, it could be expired or any number of things.

Direct farm sales and a little friendly competition would insure that. The state admits it doesn't want us to drink raw milk period. Any regulation will be utilized to that end. Just look at California.

 

[ChrisL]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

They should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations if that is what the consumer wants. If their basic cleanliness regulations are going to double and quadruple the price they can keep them.

Thing is, a lot of people will take advantage of lax regulations when it comes to cleanliness. I'm not worried about raw milk, but of course the production facilities need to be clean. Otherwise, there could fecal matter and other such disgusting things in the milk. Also, it could be expired or any number of things.

Direct farm sales and a little friendly competition would insure that. The state admits it doesn't want us to drink raw milk period. Any regulation will be utilized to that end. Just look at California.

I don't know though, people get greedy and sometimes careless. That's what happens sometimes. Like I said though, that's my only problem with it. Personally, I've never even tried raw milk, but if that's what some people prefer, I don't think the government should be able to prevent people from consuming it at their own risk. If there weren't any kind of sanitary regulations, that should be on a label just so people are aware of the risks.

 

[Flopper]

Between 1993 and 2006 more than 1500 people in the United States became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Whether raw milk is safe to drink depends on the health of the cows, the handling of the milk; the cleaning and sterilization of equipment, and storage time and temperature. Pasteurized which removes over 99% of the bacteria significantly reduces the chance of becoming sick from contaminated milk.

Federal laws prevent the interstate sale of raw milk but many states allow sales within the state. The push, if you want to call it that to allow raw milk sales across the country comes from small dairy farms struggling to survive, health food addicts that believe in the magic properties of raw milk, and right wing nuts who want to abolish all food safety laws.

 

[ChrisL]

Between 1993 and 2006 more than 1500 people in the United States became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Whether raw milk is safe to drink depends on the health of the cows, the handling of the milk; the cleaning and sterilization of equipment, and storage time and temperature. Pasteurized which removes over 99% of the bacteria significantly reduces the chance of becoming sick from contaminated milk.

Federal laws prevent the interstate sale of raw milk but many states allow sales within the state. The push, if you want to call it that to allow raw milk sales across the country comes from small dairy farms struggling to survive, health food addicts that believe in the magic properties of raw milk, and right wing nuts who want to abolish all food safety laws.

Well, if people want to risk it, I don't think the government should have to stop them. Who cares? Let people drink contaminated poop milk. They aren't hurting anyone else. As long as the consumer is aware, I don't see a problem with it.

 

[boedicca]

If raw milk were that dangerous, people would not have commonly consumed it.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Here's a little something to think about for those who keep telling us the government should stay out of our business and allow free sale of raw milk.

45 in Utah have campylobacteriosis from raw milk - CNN.com

Awe.. that is too bad. Stay the hell out of what I eat, drink and feed my kids. Grew up on a small dairy farm, none of us died.

I eat raw pork liver as well.

Stupid idiots did not know how to take care of their milk.

There's big difference in small diary farms of yesterday with local distribution. Today, diary farms are huge, some with as many 30,000 cows with little attention paid to their health compared to the small farms of yesterday. The milk on the table today may have traveled hundreds of miles before if finally reaches the dinner table weeks after it comes from the cow. Only on a fool would suggest we not pasteurized milk today.

I would never advocate buying raw milk from big-agri concerns like the ones you describe. The way they treat their animals and the product is atrocious. That's one of the reasons pasteurization became a requirement. But buying raw milk from a small holder, especially knowing that the family that cares for the animals and handles the milk consumes it raw, too...that's an entirely different matter. I prefer buying as much of my food fresh and raw from farmers who grow it, and feed it to their own families.

That is all true except that pasteurization was designed to inactivate the enzymes that oxidize milk fat after homogenization without significantly changing the flavor of the milk. It is not designed to kill so call pathogens and it can not make poor quality Holstein milk into organic Jersey milk. There is no evidence that "big-agri" raw milk is any more likely to be associated with food-borne illness. Many "big-agri" farmers drink their own milk raw.

I agree with your general assessment about what pasteurization accomplishes in milk. Unfortunately, the general public has been sold a bill of goods that only pasteurized milk is safe to consume, raw milk is to be condemned and those who sell it should be jailed, those who consume it deserve what they get.
I beg to differ on the point that big-agribusinesses produce good, wholesome milk of the same quality that small holders do. And since most big-agri "farmers' operate in absentia, I would wager that the only way they consume milk produced on those types of farms is if it is offered for sale at the super market nearby.

 

[OnePercenter]

No shit!

 

[Alex.]

The Dangers of Unpasteurized Milk

 

[rawmilkmike]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

Our government is controlled by the industries it is supposed to regulate so it has a conflict of interest when it comes to our safety.

 

[rawmilkmike]

No shit!

No shit. Pun intended.

 

[rawmilkmike]

The Dangers of Unpasteurized Milk

USFoodandDrugAdmin, is one of raw milk's competitors. They have a conflict of interest when it comes to raw milk and our health.

 

[rawmilkmike]

The Dangers of Unpasteurized Milk

Pasteurization does not insure that these bacteria are not in the milk. There are no studies. What is said is that: pasteurization does not significantly change the nutritional value printed on the label and that they have done no resent studies that prove that pasteurization causes milk protein intolerance and that they don't recognize the studies that show pasteurization causes asthma. You don't need a study to prove that. Hyperbole, association is not proof of cause. What they know is that people that drink raw milk sometime get diarrhea just like the rest of us. The CDC's Minnesota study shows that the average American is 9 times more likely to contract a so called foodborne illness than people who drink raw milk. The named bacteria are some times found in diarrhea. That doesn't mean that they are the cause or that they are responsible for complications arising from medical treatments which have many deadly side effects. The named bacteria are seldom found in raw milk sold for human consumption and have never been proven to cause illness when they are. The CDC has never documented a single death associated with raw fluid milk consumption. Raw milk is healthy and is especially important for children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems. The illnesses they are referring to are associated with diarrhea for which their own study shows raw milk is preventative. Healthy people have never been showed to get sick from any of the named bacteria. If you look them up you will find the opposite is said. These bacteria are everywhere. They are in us, on us, and on almost everything we touch and or eat. Comments are disabled for this video. I wonder why.

 

[rawmilkmike]

Here's a little something to think about for those who keep telling us the government should stay out of our business and allow free sale of raw milk.

45 in Utah have campylobacteriosis from raw milk - CNN.com

Awe.. that is too bad. Stay the hell out of what I eat, drink and feed my kids. Grew up on a small dairy farm, none of us died.

I eat raw pork liver as well.

Stupid idiots did not know how to take care of their milk.

There's big difference in small diary farms of yesterday with local distribution. Today, diary farms are huge, some with as many 30,000 cows with little attention paid to their health compared to the small farms of yesterday. The milk on the table today may have traveled hundreds of miles before if finally reaches the dinner table weeks after it comes from the cow. Only on a fool would suggest we not pasteurized milk today.

I would never advocate buying raw milk from big-agri concerns like the ones you describe. The way they treat their animals and the product is atrocious. That's one of the reasons pasteurization became a requirement. But buying raw milk from a small holder, especially knowing that the family that cares for the animals and handles the milk consumes it raw, too...that's an entirely different matter. I prefer buying as much of my food fresh and raw from farmers who grow it, and feed it to their own families.

That is all true except that pasteurization was designed to inactivate the enzymes that oxidize milk fat after homogenization without significantly changing the flavor of the milk. It is not designed to kill so call pathogens and it can not make poor quality Holstein milk into organic Jersey milk. There is no evidence that "big-agri" raw milk is any more likely to be associated with food-borne illness. Many "big-agri" farmers drink their own milk raw.

I agree with your general assessment about what pasteurization accomplishes in milk. Unfortunately, the general public has been sold a bill of goods that only pasteurized milk is safe to consume, raw milk is to be condemned and those who sell it should be jailed, those who consume it deserve what they get.
I beg to differ on the point that big-agribusinesses produce good, wholesome milk of the same quality that small holders do. And since most big-agri "farmers' operate in absentia, I would wager that the only way they consume milk produced on those types of farms is if it is offered for sale at the super market nearby.

Who said "that big-agribusinesses produce good, wholesome milk of the same quality that small holders do." All I was saying is that most raw milk is still a super-food regardless where it comes from and that pasteurization does not improve it or make it safer. Of course some raw milks are better than others.

 

[rawmilkmike]

They should put a label on it letting people know of the risks, and let people decide if they want to risk getting sick or not. I don't see how the government can FORCE you to eat safely. People should be able to consume what they want. As far as the sellers of this milk, they should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations (you know, like rats, bugs, etc.) but still be allowed to sell their product, IMO.

They should have to pass basic cleanliness regulations if that is what the consumer wants. If their basic cleanliness regulations are going to double and quadruple the price they can keep them.

Thing is, a lot of people will take advantage of lax regulations when it comes to cleanliness. I'm not worried about raw milk, but of course the production facilities need to be clean. Otherwise, there could fecal matter and other such disgusting things in the milk. Also, it could be expired or any number of things.

Direct farm sales and a little friendly competition would insure that. The state admits it doesn't want us to drink raw milk period. Any regulation will be utilized to that end. Just look at California.

I don't know though, people get greedy and sometimes careless. That's what happens sometimes. Like I said though, that's my only problem with it. Personally, I've never even tried raw milk, but if that's what some people prefer, I don't think the government should be able to prevent people from consuming it at their own risk. If there weren't any kind of sanitary regulations, that should be on a label just so people are aware of the risks.

If you ever tried to find a source of raw milk, washed 30 half gallon jars, drove out to the farm, went into the barn to fill them for your family and drank raw milk for a few months, you would first find how regulation has made it difficult to find and obtain raw milk and maybe even how much it adds to the cost without improving it's quality in the least. It's health benefits you will start to see almost immediately and it's safety is proven after just three months. If you are scared, look up the so called deadly pathogens and see what they say. Small producers aren't the only ones who can get greedy and sometimes careless. The same can happen with large producers and the regulators that work for them. Why do you think it is so hard to find healthy foods in our nations restaurants and supermarkets? Who can you trust to tell you a food's risk to your health?

 

[rawmilkmike]

Between 1993 and 2006 more than 1500 people in the United States became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Whether raw milk is safe to drink depends on the health of the cows, the handling of the milk; the cleaning and sterilization of equipment, and storage time and temperature. Pasteurized which removes over 99% of the bacteria significantly reduces the chance of becoming sick from contaminated milk.

Federal laws prevent the interstate sale of raw milk but many states allow sales within the state. The push, if you want to call it that to allow raw milk sales across the country comes from small dairy farms struggling to survive, health food addicts that believe in the magic properties of raw milk, and right wing nuts who want to abolish all food safety laws.

Well, if people want to risk it, I don't think the government should have to stop them. Who cares? Let people drink contaminated poop milk. They aren't hurting anyone else. As long as the consumer is aware, I don't see a problem with it.

The only ones saying it is "contaminated poop milk" are it's competitors.

 

[rawmilkmike]

Between 1993 and 2006 more than 1500 people in the United States became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Whether raw milk is safe to drink depends on the health of the cows, the handling of the milk; the cleaning and sterilization of equipment, and storage time and temperature. Pasteurized which removes over 99% of the bacteria significantly reduces the chance of becoming sick from contaminated milk.

Federal laws prevent the interstate sale of raw milk but many states allow sales within the state. The push, if you want to call it that to allow raw milk sales across the country comes from small dairy farms struggling to survive, health food addicts that believe in the magic properties of raw milk, and right wing nuts who want to abolish all food safety laws.

Pasteurized milk is also made from raw milk and is also sometimes included in raw milk stats.
-----
The study was called “Nonpasteurized Dairy Products, Disease Outbreaks, and State Laws, 1993–2006” It says in the abstract: “Nonpasteurized products caused a disproportionate number (≈150× greater/unit of product consumed) of outbreaks” Nowhere in the results do you find 150x or “greater/unit of product consumed”
-----
It says “1% of U.S. residents consume raw milk” which is from the 2002-2003 FoodNet Population Survey. It's 3% in the 2006-2007survey. It refers to outbreaks not cases. Raw milk outbreaks average 20 cases per outbreak. Pasteurized milk averages 1,645 cases per outbreak.
-----
Why just 1993–2006? In 1985, there were over 16,000 confirmed cases of Salmonella infection that were traced back to pasteurized milk from a single dairy. From 1993–2006 there were only 2,098 all together.
-----
In 2007 the number of raw milk consumers tripled. They all ready knew this for 4 yrs. This study only involved “outbreaks in which investigators reported whether the product was pasteurized or raw.” In most outbreaks involving pasteurized dairy, investigators do NOT report that the milk is pasteurized; they just say “milk” or “cheese.”
-----
It compared “raw milk AND raw milk products” to just “pasteurized milk” and not pasteurized milk products. When a person goes to the hospital with a food-borne illness, the first question asked is “Did you drink raw milk?” If the person answers yes, he or she is immediately admitted and no further questions are asked. Most of these people are out in just a day or two despite the horrific safe record hospitals have.
-----
The association is completely arbitrary. We don't know if the cause is even bacterial, which bacteria if it is, or where it came from. All these bacteria can be pasted by human contact. Some are even airborne or in soil and most if not all are already in our bodies. When they aren't in our body that could be called an imbalance. Look up Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) stool poop. So we go from 150x to 50x to 5x to 1.35x to 0.7x before we even consider that fact that most pasteurized milk outbreak-associations are unreported and raw milk outbreak-associations are over reported.

 

[gallantwarrior]

interesting that treated milk and its possible implication in food borne outbreaks has not been studied or documented.

 

[rawmilkmike]

Between 1993 and 2006 more than 1500 people in the United States became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Whether raw milk is safe to drink depends on the health of the cows, the handling of the milk; the cleaning and sterilization of equipment, and storage time and temperature. Pasteurized which removes over 99% of the bacteria significantly reduces the chance of becoming sick from contaminated milk.

Federal laws prevent the interstate sale of raw milk but many states allow sales within the state. The push, if you want to call it that to allow raw milk sales across the country comes from small dairy farms struggling to survive, health food addicts that believe in the magic properties of raw milk, and right wing nuts who want to abolish all food safety laws.

The push, for raw milk is consumer driven and is bipartisan.

Yes, consumers that live near state borders do cross to buy raw milk but Mark McAfee, California’s largest raw milk producer is the only one challenging the ban on interstate commerce.

Yes, small dairy farms are struggling to survive.

Healthy food is not addictive. That is the problem. Most health-food nuts actually avoid dairy products.

There is nothing magical about healthy food. It's just common sense.

Food safety regulators are actually breaking the law. We are only asking for fair administration of the regulations and the law. These new raw milk bills are just additional regulation designed to make raw milk more difficult to obtain.