Milk...blood...puss...mucus!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Stephanie on March 21, 2008 at 11:11am

Well, you're entering the raw vs. pasteurized milk debate here. It's a pretty big deal these days, especially in states that are trying to ban the sale of raw milk via back-door regulations that make it impossible for the product to pass inspections.

I work at an agricultural publication, so I think I can give a little educated insight into this.

I'm assuming you're asking whether raw milk contains nasty stuff? Or are you asking whether pasteurization would kill that nasty stuff?

The answer is: It depends.

I suppose raw milk could contain blood and puss, but only if the cow is infected and untreated. Does it happen? Probably. Does it happen at dairies that supply raw milk directly to consumers? Probably not, because they make sure to provide clean products to their customers. The customers are already health-conscious and demand their product be clean. It's simple capitalism there. You screw over your consumers, and they stop buying. As a result, farmers take care of their cows and follow strict guidelines. It's a matter of pride and responsibility.

Does pasteurization kill any bad stuff in blood and puss in the milk? Again, probably. It kills just about everything, including the good stuff. Many refer to it as a "milk-flavored beverage." (There's LOTS of stuff on raw milk on the Web, both for and against.)

Even among commercial dairies that sell the standardized pasteurized milk, there are strict guidelines, plus there are self-regulatory associations ("unions" if you will) that require their members to be ethical. Many states, counties and even small regions have these groups that are largely social, so they pull double duty: no one wants to face their friends and tell them they produce sub-par milk. It will also put you out of business.

Now, I'm sure there are producers out there that aren't so altruistic and will do anything for a buck, but that's why there are so many regulations in place.

Overall, I would say the U.S. dairy industry is very safe.
Is milk good for you? That's another issue entirely.

Does this help at all?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by LilyLoo on March 21, 2008 at 11:24am

Yes it does help a lot! Thanks! I think either way, I am going to stay away from dairy, but it helps to know that its safe in general for those that I care about that still drink it.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Charles on March 21, 2008 at 11:13am

From the fabulous website notmilk.com:

Thousands of clues have added up to condemn milk and dairy
products as being unsafe. One new clue was actually
discovered in 1987 and has remained buried for twelve years.

SURVIVAL OF LISTERIA MONOCYTOGENES IN MILK DURING HIGH-
TEMPERATURE, SHORT-TIME PASTEURIZATION.

This study was performed at the University of Wisconsin and
appeared in the July 1987 (Volume 53) issue of the Journal
of Environmental Microbiology. The authors were Doyle MP,
Glass KA, et.al.

WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?

Milk from cows inoculated with listeria was pooled for 2 to
4 days and then heated at 162 degrees Fahrenheit for 16
seconds in a high-temperature, short-time pasteurization
unit.

Live listeria bacteria was then successfully isolated from
the milk after heat treatment in 11 of 12 pasteurization
trials. Results indicate listeria can survive the minimum
high-temperature, short-time treatment required by the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration for pasteurizing milk.

In February of 1999, 350,000 cases of milk and dairy
products were withdrawn from every state in America because
of listeria contamination. Dozens of Americans died from a
bacterial infection that might take as long as 45 days to
incubate in the human body.

One plays a deadly game of Russian Roulette by eating milk
and cheese products.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul on March 21, 2008 at 11:17am

What about raw milk? We (some of us, anyway) were clearly designed to tolerate/digest it beyond weaning.....and I've heard many stories of how it has dramatically healed people. ???

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Raw by Default on March 21, 2008 at 1:06pm

I don't think anyone was "designed" to tolerate/digest it beyond weaning. Some people just happen to be able to (and even that could be questioned... you don't know exactly what's going in your body on at a cellular level). Being able to merely digest it doesn't mean it's natural. Milk is meant for baby cows, after all. If anything, people who want to drink milk should be drinking human breast milk. But that's not really natural, either. No other animal, as far as I know, drinks any kind of milk past babyhood.

There are more than enough reasons not to drink milk, besides blood and pus. rBGH, anyone? Or how about a nice case of Parkinson's (if you're a man)?

With all the other, safer things you could be drinking, I don't see why anyone would take their life in their hands just for a little bit of moo juice.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by LilyLoo on March 21, 2008 at 1:11pm

Yeah I always think about that too. Its weird that we are the only species that drinks another species' milk. The other thing to think about is if we needed milk beyond nursing, why does the mother's breasts stop developing the milk after a while?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul on March 21, 2008 at 1:14pm

Because its more efficient (or actually do-able) to take it from the environment. We are not able to convert grass into milk - cows are. (in times past) It is a massive evolutionary advantage to be able to live with animals that can simply eat grass and produce a life-giving substance, even if there is no other sustenance for us humans. That is the "why" .....understanding our physiology and history. Now, we can make choices, but we must honor our physiology and history, no?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Raw by Default on March 21, 2008 at 1:17pm

No. I've got lactose-intolerant ancestors. So does a large proportion of the population. Some say up to 70%! That doesn't sound like physiology and history are encouraging us to drink milk.

And using that argument, we'd all still be eating meat, too. (Some people would argue that we're meant to eat meat... even though our bodies point to the opposite!)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul on March 21, 2008 at 1:29pm

Raw by Default - No offense, but it sounds like you need to be right more than you actually care about the discussion point. If you want to actually discuss the point and keep an open mind, I'm game. If you want to declare "correctness" without really entertaining any other point of view, I don't really see the point. It is called cognitive dissonance - many people think they are discussing or debating, when all they are able to do is see support for their own point of view, because otherwise their egoic sense of self is threatened if they are "wrong".

But anyway....on to the point....

Anyone who studies evolutionary biology can tell you from a phylogenetic analysis that certain populations of humans have developed and maintained the capacity to digest milk as an evolutionary adaptation to certain challenging environments. A quick Google search will show you many scientific studies on this. See this one as an example. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199710/ai_n8778998

I'm not saying you should drink milk or that we should have evolved as we did, but it is delusion to not acknowledge the reality of the situation and to understand it as deeply as possible from every possible perspective. I, personally, love raw milk and last got some from Organic Pastures (where I also buy my truly raw almonds).

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Raw by Default on March 21, 2008 at 1:48pm

I'm not trying to be right. I'm trying to share some of what I've learned over the years. If you want to drink milk, that's up to you. I can't dictate what you put into your body.

I am aware that certain populations (mainly European) have evolved to tolerate milk more easily. But to me, this implies that, at some point in our collective past, before that evolutionary change, most of us couldn't tolerate it past infancy. Some groups around the world still can't; it wasn't advantageous for them to do so.

Arguing for raw milk is also a totally different thing than arguing for milk and its benefits in general. Animal welfare, over-grazing, hormones, pasteurization, homogenization, infections, hormones, BSE, osteoporosis, obesity... Something that should be so simple ends up being one complicated mess. And as more people around the world try to adopt a SAD diet, the demand for milk will end up costing a lot to the environment and people's health in the long run. Because you're not going to be able to supply the demand for milk for a region like Asia with raw, organic milk and dairy products.

So, if you want to drink raw milk, that's one thing. But we in the Western world have to think of what kind of example we're setting, and realize that others may not have the knowledge or resources to drink the pristine sort of dairy beverage that you're talking about.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul on March 21, 2008 at 2:19pm

I totally agree that the often heinous practices of conventional dairy farming are muddled with the sometimes decent practices of raw dairy farming.

If we wanted to get to a healthy/sustainable place for our world, I think there needs to be enough depth of understanding for people to see the nuances....so maybe we could have raw milk, still have milk....without vilifying the entire sector of agriculture,...
....but also shining the light of awareness on toxic practices that must shift.

Maybe the American experiment can be that we, as a relatively small part of the world's population, can demonstrate how to be toxic and how to recover to a good place from it....maybe saving the rest from having to go that path?

I don't know. Who knows.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Stephanie on March 21, 2008 at 11:31am

Yeah, I don't think it's fair to target milk with listeria. Look at all the spinach and lettuce recalls we had this past year.

Nothing is completely safe. Are you going to stop eating everything, then?

I hope not!

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last