How significantly does the nutritional value of milk differ from one dairy to another?
I find myself thinking about that question, given the debate and discussion following my previous post–about the Stanford study on lactose intolerance, differing vitamin D values, and the importance of grass feeding of cows. I’m also prompted by two recent dairy tours I’ve had in recent weeks.
A little over two weeks ago, on the Friday before the Raw Milk Symposium, I had the good fortune to take a tour of Wisconsin dairyman Scott Trautman’s farm outside Madison. He opened his farm to Raw Milk symposium speakers and area friends.
Kim Hartke did a very nice writeup about the farm tour, about how clean his barn is, how resplendent the fields appear, how healthy the animals look.
One thing that struck me, which was a little different than what impressed Kim Hartke, was how non-political Scott was in giving his one-hour or so farm tour. There was no belly-aching, as one might have expected, given that Wisconsin’s Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has come down so hard on him. No pot shots that would have been easy–“Here is the milk parlor DATCP has such problems with. Does it look like a problem to you?” (For Scott’s description of his political challenges, see his blog.)
No, Scott focused instead on how he transitioned the farm from a run-down place with depleted soil when he took it over in 2003 to a place with dozens of varieties of thriving grasses and grains and such healthy cows and cattle that there’s almost never any animal illness…and no antibiotics or vaccinations.
“I consider myself an entrepreneur,” he told the crowd of guests he led around his 120-acre place. “I grew up wanting to be a farmer. I did dangerous reading–Joel Salatin’s book, which said, ‘You can farm.'”
Shortly after acquiring the farm, “The smartest thing I ever did was straighten out my soil,” he recalled as he showed off a field of rye.
Before he began farming, he explained, there was an Internet business he ran in the 1990s, until 2002. That’s important. “I took my Internet money and put it into minerals for the soil.” And indeed, the soil looks dark and rich, the pasture is lush.
As he escorded visitors to another field with cattle looking curiously at the visitors, he explained, “I have to stay here long enough so people who wonder how I’m going to fail will fall away.”
When he got to the 90 grazing dairy cows, he explained that he milks them only once a day (which yields about 70% of potential productivity, but results in a richer milk and is okay now without a dairy license) and leaves the calves with their mothers for eight weeks, which is in complete defiance of conventional wisdom. “How much illness have we had in the last year?” he asked at one point. “One calf was sick for one day.”
And as he showed off a small fruit orchard, he added: “I’m about diversity, in my products, in my life.”
Last week, I had the opportunity to fully appreciate what Scott Trautman is doing, when I traveled through Connecticut, and had a brief tour of a feedlot dairy that specializes in locally produced lightly pasteurized milk. I’ve seen the photos of feedlots, but must say that actually being in one and seeing it up close, with about 200 cows and calves, was different. (I won’t identify it by name, since I was there as a passerby, and I don’t think their milk is much different from other feedlot milk produced all over the U.S.)
First, I was nearly bowled over by the smell, and this feedlot, I’m told, is one of the good ones.
Then, there was the disheartening realization that on a beautiful sunny day the cows’ only food was a gray concoction of hay and silage, while pretty green pasture out beyond the barn sat unused.
The upscale consumers, who are attracted by the “local” branding and marketing pitch, have no idea of how this high-priced milk differs from that Scott Trautman is producing.
Actually, I don’t know exactly how the milks differ. I tasted Scott’s milk, and it was delicious. The camembert, chevre, gouda, and other cheeses produced from that milk by an associate, Bill Anderson, were exquisite, worthy of French masters.
As for the milk produced in the Connecticut feedlot, I didn’t sample it. And I never would, even under duress.
It would certainly make for interesting research, for scientists to conduct a detailed comparative analysis of Scott Trautman’s milk, and the Connecticut milk (or any other feedlot milk).
I feel confident that Dave Milano’s assessment of milk “ecology” would be borne out: “That ecology begins with the most abundant and durable crop on earth—grass—which unsurprisingly is a tremendously effective solar collector, a perfect companion to the soil and its microbial colonies, a cleaner of water and air, and a marvelous carbon store. Virtually indigestible by humans, grass is a necessary food for cattle. Cattle transform…grass into milk, a food very easily digested by most humans, which happens to contain an astounding mix of ingredients beneficial to human health…”
I’m hoping the Stanford research turns out to be the first of many studies.
Per cp’s comment, did you tour this raw milk dairy?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-raw-milk-20100422,0,2185455.story?page=1
Indeed, can we require all future warning labels on raw milk (since they do not have the "kill" step) require a photo of the cow on the right, and the statement, "this product may contain cow manure"? It is a real raw milk dairy – seems fair to show consumers what they are buying.
It is already very common for medium-scale semi-industrialized cheesemakers to make so-called "raw milk cheese" with milk that has been thermalized below the legal threshold for pastuerization, and then market this cheese as "raw milk cheese." Here in WI, I have already been overhearing numerous dairy industry big-wigs going on rants about how thermalized milk and raw milk are one and the same (in regards to cheese) and that there should be no distinction between them in marketing or information to consumers. I fear it is only a matter of time before they begin applying this philosophy to fluid milk.
I’ve combed through my photo archives relating to work looking at CAFOs. Ironically, the photo of a raw dairy producer in the link above speaks volumes against dairy – raw or CAFO – filthy. Can you speak to that?
You or I cannot tell whether a given farm can produce safe foods in their raw form, merely by looking at photos of it. To really understand food safety, you have to understand the intimacies of the microbio-ecology of the farm, which is a profoundly complex task. All of our modern science and technology will never be able to conquer this problem in a reductionist, compartmentalized way, no matter how hard we try and how much money we spend on research.
One valuable lesson we can learn from European cheesemakers, is that chlorine is fundamentally anti-thetical to the cheesemaking process. While the cheesemaking process is about encouraging the fermentation of milk, chlorine only serves to destroy the natural bacteria present in an enviroment which are adapted precisely to fermenting milk. Many of the pathogenic bacteria which we struggle with are actually "pioneer species", that is to say that they are the first species to colonize the enviroment after it has been "wiped clean" by chlorine.
This is not much unlike conventional crop farmers who till in the earth every single year, only to find that noxious weeds take over their fields. If instead they were to encourage a perenial poly-culture, while tilling strategically only when absolutely neccessary, they will find that noxious weeds are quickly crowded out by the beniefical plants — and using toxic pesticides like round-up becomes unneccessary and undesirable.
What I hear you saying, in your question, is that animals are inherintly filthy. This reflects the underlying flaw in your "food fascism" ideology. You fear nature, rather than embrace it. YOU are an animal, Lykke, and you are killing yourself (and us) by your irrational fear of the natural.
So, you agree we can and should label raw milk with that photo? You see no problem in the practices? Okay, let consumers be informed and see the reality of raw milk production (which looks just like a CAFO dairy or worse in sanitation – frankly, I’ve seen much cleaner cow pictures from stall barns at CAFOs compared with that video – gee, one might wonder why the dairyman didn’t decide to clean-up a bit before the newspapers arrived).
If DATCP gets their way and forces him to build an unsanitary wall in his milking barn, the cows will start to look more like the ones from the CAFO or the dirty raw dairy. Why? Because that is what DATCP wants — dirty raw milk, so they can go on rampages and shut it all down, say "I told you so" and keep their fascist iron-fisted corporate-state control of our food and farming system.
BH
http://www.JuicyMaters.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/opinion/27iht-old27.html
1910 Flower Hospital Changes Milk
NEW YORK The use of pasteurized milk has been discontinued at Flower Hospital and its affiliated school by order of its director, Dr. Royal S. Copeland. Only pure raw milk is now consumed in these institutions. This change has been made after careful consultation among the medical faculty and is in line with the advanced views of the leading experts on nutrition both here and abroad.
Cow manure plays a very important role in the grand scheme of things and is as natural as snot in your nose and wax in your ears. Eliminating its visible presence from milk is all well and good however this merely serves to placate a societal stereotype and clearly offers no guaranty that a specific microorganism will not be present, if that is indeed your ultimate concern.
Ken Conrad
First of all no "process" will replace "principals".
We can create all the tests and protocols in the world in as it relates to milking and milk safety.
Yet if we avoid/violate the principals of the soil, forage, needs of the milk animal ,all will be in vain and the tendacy to marginalize the principals will be complete when we reach the stage of regulation.
As for milking an animal covered in manure as we saw on the Tribune video, I feel it is rude and unacceptable behavore to put my beliefs and risks on other people simply by way of forced education or unfortuneately in some cases lack of concern.
My real concern is that the needs of the milk cows in the video are not being met, and all indications are that the milk is not what the producers think they have or the client thinks they are getting.
The process of grass will not trump the principals of cow nutirition and lack of such could create the avenue of mutation or infection by a pathogenic organizism.
I know this statement may realize several passages from books stating the opposite, however, anybody who has written a book has yet to be asked how things are going 5 years after the fact.
We are now beyond the 5 year mark on most of these books and the theory is failing miserably "except" in a very few rare cases.
Not the word except..it reads exception not the norm.
This video is the norm I’m afraid those like it are getting worse as time goes on….not the utopia set out in our early grass based books.
As for a 200 cow dairy called a Cafo by Mr gumpert….that hardley falls into the catagory.
I know up to 500 cow inside dairies that will literaly kick many grass based daires butt on milk quality and cow comfort and meeting the needs of the cows.
That is the key…not the fact they get to eat grass.
There is a wide range of ways ways to meet the needs of a cow which will give great quailty milk…only a few of them have grass as a major component………….
as we stands right now as it relates to soil health and forage quality.
Will grass change in its staus and become more previlant… and can we get to more grass based dairies …yes but it will take time…different genetics, better soil and wider range of forage species other than we have now to work with.
This will take time, effort, cooperation, a much deeper understanding of what we are dealing with and our consumers understanding our our current situation….not just grass.
Tim Wightman
The FDA sees only One Raw Milk in America….. The really dirty one that must be pasteurized. The one that is never tested for pathogens at any time. The one that triggers allergies and causes rampant Lactose Intolerance.
The state of CA has placed into law the other Raw Milk…the One for People.
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=109855625702224
If you do not get this picture….then perhaps you can try your nose and smell yourself into reality.
Mark
Are you claiming that on dairies that produce milk that is pasteurized, the cows do not poop?
Do you agree that the local burger joint should have a sign saying, "Cheeseburgers may contain Bob’s saliva?"
The local burger joint should honestly have a warning on it that says, "This burger contains varying levels of Ammonium Hydroxide." Did you see that part in Food, Inc? I love how when BPI first started putting this in their meat slush that the customers started complaining that the meat actually tasted like Ammonia. So all they did was just lower the amount till it couldn’t be tasted anymore. Sounds yummy!
That reminds me of a story I was told where there was a family that had two boys. One day the boys wanted to see a movie that the parents did not think was appropriate. The boys protested that there was only a little bad language in it and that is why it had the rating it had. The dad got an idea and went out to the back yard and scooped up a little of their pet dog’s poop. He then proceeded to make a batch of brownies with just a little bit of his special ingredient in it. When he presented the brownies to the boys, apparently they were smart enough to wonder why dad had made them this batch of brownies and they asked him what he had done to them. He then told them what he had put in the brownies. Of course they didn’t want to eat the brownies. The moral of the story though was that there was just a little bit in the brownies, so why did it matter? There was just a little bit of bad language in the movie the boys wanted to see, so why did it matter? There is just a little Ammonium Hydroxide in those burgers, so why does it matter?
Of course, we should all feel good because BPI’s website tells us that Ammonium Hydroxide occurs naturally in meat products, so they are just adding a little more and it is perfectly safe and OK for us. Never mind that a quick MSDS search for Ammonium Hydroxide reveals that this chemical "Causes digestive and respiratory tract burns. Harmful if swallowed." and "Harmful if swallowed. May cause severe and permanent damage to the digestive tract. Causes gastrointestinal tract burns. Causes throat constriction, vomiting, convulsions, and shock." Of course what we are getting in our lovely hamburger is of much less concentration then straight out of the bottle, but you still have to wonder what kind of cumulative effect this stuff has on the body in small frequent doses. I’m sure it’s nothing, the government says it is OK. See here: http://tiny.cc/hjhvz
That reminds me of the HFCS people that say HFCS is perfectly safe because fructose is a naturally occurring substance and there is nothing to worry about there either, except that there is nothing natural about HFCS and freely available fructose can cause many adverse things to happen in the body.
Brandon
They called me a Maverick Dairyman….sure beats other things they have called me in the past. Connecting to PETA friendly organizations is something that can get a valley dairy guy in hot water….in our case it has been very successfull and consumer connecting.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/04/25/1910407/maverick-valley-dairy-owner-has.html
Mark
[Adherents claim when collected properly from grass-fed cows, raw milk, which is neither homogenized nor pasteurized, is a "complete and balanced food. You could literally live on it and nothing else for the rest of your life," says the Web site raw-milk-facts.com.]
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/wisconsin.raw.milk.2.1652048.html
The same could be said for the "misinformation" of the govt. Consuming lunch meat is so much more dangerous that consuming raw dairy. (not from a confined dairy,etc) The lunch meat is playing russian roulette with your life, yet the govt doesn’t appear to do anything about the lunch meat, why is that?
Brandon, that’s just another reason NOT to eat at fast food joints.
Hmm, are you saying misinformation on raw milk fine because other industries that you don’t like do the same thing?
And while two wrongs don’t make a right, those that support the governments campaign against raw milk have no standing to criticize those that are promoting the good stuff.
Yes, living an entire life on milk probably isn’t wise, but some have done the milk diet for months, and are still here to tell about it (I here that the diet can really alter the mind as well as the body). Stretching facts is different than out right falsehoods and lies.
Milk is balanced food…and if you had to live on just one thing, raw milk would support life better than most other options. Lykke, I’m not sure how you can look at yourself in the mirror when you shave…but if i were you, given the spiteful desperation that is coming through…I’d get and electric razor…..
Lykke, Nope, not at all.
Milk farmer,the credibility has been long gone.
Poop is valuable but yet very missunderstood in its value. Manure is the true measure of a cows health….just as it is a measure of a humans health. yet…..I do not see many doctors clambering to investigate fecal matter as a reflection of GUT health and immunity.
The bacteria found in grass fed manure is quite different than its unlucky grain fed, antibiotic fed, BST injected cousin, CAFO confined bovine friends poop.
Bottom line….the Raw Milk for humans….millieu is different ( ecosystem, feed and terrain ) and that makes the cow and the raw milk different. I did not say perfect…I said different.
It is possible to have pathogens in an ecosystem designed for safe raw milk production, but the risk is reduced to near zero. It is like finding ice at sea level near the equator…it is pretty damn hard.
Thats what the data says and that is what the truth is.
Two Raw Milks in America.
Wisconsin is just about to embark on 20 months of small farmer pioneering hope and I hope that the WI dairymen take food safety seriously…if not they will be giving the executioner the rope to hang them with. Human consumption raw milk is not the same as just having clean raw milk that is was intended for pasteurization….it is a different world.
Raw Milk for humans is a complete and conscious departure from the PMO.
Mark
As an ex-vegetarian, I really like the idea of allying with animal rights groups.
I really do believe that the biggest threat to the dairy industry is NOT a blown-out-of-proportion-by-the-establishment, small localized outbreak from raw milk. Rather, the biggest threat to the dairy industry is the increasing number of news stories and campaigns surrounding animal cruelty and living conditions in CAFOs and conventional farms.
Before we know it, many American will not know the difference between healthy ethically raised pastured animals, and the poor factory farmed animals whose are abused and unhealthy.
The increasing number of vegans out there is testiment to the neccessity of us allying with animal rights groups — to show that there is a way to raise animals for food in a way that respects them, gives them dignity, and allows them to express their natural behavior and niche in the eco-system. And raw milk is an excellent medium to carry this message to the public!!!
Creative thinking there Mark. Hopefully more will follow your lead!
Those farmers that never ‘have it all figured out’ – humility – vs. the arrogance of a walking bubble of perfection that they walk in. That is the type of attitude that results in problems.
I want to see culture change: farmers to set a different and higher standard for themselves; for them to understand, as I do, with my farm, how massive my responsibility is to do my job to the very best of my ability, every day.
A big part of that is to continue to learn. To not reject ideas simply because of who says them, but to examine them for their merit, period.
If anything – that is our key to success here. I learn from everyone. But does anyone learn from me? I know what you know, I know what I know. You still only know what you know. That’s a fine deal for me – but not so great for you. I’m speaking to each and every one of you.
I am certainly not defending Lykke – (all flattery aside for my farm, right?) – but as one who is lately describing himself as an irritant to the system – I appreciate those that would bring divergent opinion that at the very least strikes up debate, thought that may not otherwise be thought if we are left to our own little group of the righteous. I hate group think. It is a destructive thing.
I’ve learned something here today. Chlorine. Creating the environment. I have heard Mark talk about that with his RAMP – my first reaction was to reject it. Now I am intrigued.
Yet, as usual, I find myself straddling two worlds. How to bring the two together as efficiently and in as timely a manner as possible. Our sanitarians look at that idea of fostering ANY bacterial growth and they completely freak out.
I find my inspiration from the past – I’m giving up secrets here boys – my entrepreneurship is a lazy one – I don’t think new thoughts – I mine the past. I look to the early 1900’s before all thought was focused on industrialization – more -bigger – rather than on quality.
They didn’t kill everything they could back then – yet people did not die in droves until they kept cheapening the system up – the distillery dairies, the filth-holes we see today. There is going to have to be some kind of balance. Some kind of transition in ideas.
Not all manure is the same. Manure from grassfed cows – no, I don’t say it is perfect – but the PROBABILITY of pathogenic bacteria is far far less than with grain fed. Do you accept that or not? Then add in a sanitary system with good checks and balances, tests – we have a REASONABLY safe system. It all works together. I have great fears of who is going to bring their bubble of perfection to bear on raw milk and make people sick because if they think it is, it must be so.
So where does that leave us? Me? Where I always am. Considering it all; doing the very best that I can, moving forward, always in self-examination mode, always listening to all sides and gleaning what I can from each. So I know what I know, I know what you know, and you are left where and with what?
Scott "Irritant to the system" Trautman, despite the very best efforts of the State of Wisconsin, STILL proud dairyman
if you shudder at the 200 dairy feedlot in ct., you should visit the dean foods "horizon organic" farm located in idaho. it has close to 4,000 wet cows packed into pens with each pen holding about 250 cows each. want to try some "organic" milk? no thanks, i’ll pass.
as many people on this blog have said over and over, yes, there is a difference between raw milk intended for human consumption and raw milk intended for pasteurization.
kudos to scott for his approach.
David has commented in the past about all the reports of contaminated milk, but most are not attached to any illnesses. Only the most severe illnesses get reported, so we really dont know if there have been illnesses. Also bacteria differ in virulence, so not all produce serious illnesses. If the two latest videos of raw milk farmers is an indication of the norm in producing raw milk, it sure does explain all the reports of contaminated milk.
cp
"Indeed, can we require all future warning labels on raw milk (since they do not have the "kill" step) require a photo of the cow on the right, and the statement, "this product may contain cow manure"? It is a real raw milk dairy – seems fair to show consumers what they are buying."
The newest studies on pasteurized milk given to calves shows that dead cell toxins (created by pasteurization of milk given to calves ) can be very toxic. Perhaps even deadly. I will dig up the citation and provide it to David. It will open up a whole new can of pasteurized worms.
For now…I would much rather have a deliciuos glass of grass fed raw milk containing a minute amount of fecal matter…rather than drink any pasteurized milk that is stuffed full of dead bacterial matter that is in itself highly toxic.
It is a question of dead verse live…..why even argue the point. My body tells me which is better. I do not need the FDA to tell my body anything.
Mark
The farm I stopped at is Hytone Farm in Coventry, CT.
http://www.thefarmerscow.com/farms/hytone.html
It is one of a half dozen farms that produce milk under The Farmer’s Cow brand.
http://www.thefarmerscow.com/home.html
I want to reiterate what I said in my post: I saw nothing that was likely much different from the way dairies are run all over the country. As Tim Wightman suggests in his comment, this dairy may use practices that allow for excellent quality milk. It just didn’t feel right to see the animals crowded into a dark barn, standing in manure, on a beautiful day with green pastures beckoning, and I personally wouldn’t want to drink milk from such a place. That’s why I consume raw milk from a farm where I know the cows spend much time outside grazing during the spring, summer, and fall. That’s my personal choice. People who drink The Farmer’s Cow milk make a different choice, and it’s not necessarily a bad one.
David
cp
I can appreciate that different people have different tastes in milk. I too like raw milk from cows that eat grass and see the sun. 99% of the time, I drink raw milk from the dairies I know. On the rare occasions I can’t get it (usually in the winter), I do buy a lightly pasteurized milk. I still want the cows to see the sun and eat grass.
European studies have shown raw milk to be beneficial in allergy and asthma prevention. There are 15.44 deaths each day in the US from asthma. If only 10 percent would have benefited from raw milk, what do those 563 annual dead folks tell us about not being able to access raw milk?
After following this conversation for so long, this repeated statement is too funny. So, in previous conversations everyone agreed (including Mark) that he uses milk intended for pasteurization for butter, cheese, and other processed product (all legal). But, because he’s a good spokesperson for raw milk, that is forgiven.
Regarding my credibility, it isn’t important. Truth be told, Monsanto, the Pope, and the CIA are paying me big bucks. I’m not sure why (and it doesn’t matter so long as the check shows up), but…off the record, I suspect that a particular small dairyman in Poland who has a beef with his neighbor is behind the whole thing. Regardless, the fat check from them is worth it all (and I can use it to buy an electric razor – good suggestion, milk farmer).
"Mark, what did Mari Tardiffs, Chris Martins, Larry Pedersens, Kalee Prues, and Nicole Riggs bodies tell them when they drank raw milk?"
Their bodies told them that they had weak immune systems and that a CAFO system, or America hospital or GMO lab or other antibiotic abusing place….had created a very bad bug and that bad bug saw a welcome mat in them.
A missmatch made in American immune depression hell. A hell enjoyed by Marler and the rest of the FDA drug pushers and CAFO operators in this country. Where is the talk or action to stop the creation of superbugs??? I witnessed the FDA fighting legislation against antibiotic abuse in CA. The FDA made your short list of people sick…..
That is why I know that the Marler and the FDA drug pushers love this hell. If it was somethign they hated…we would hear them talk about it and do something about it. They are mute!!
Superbugs are not created on organic farms or organic pasture based dairies. Immune systems are rebuilt by whole biodiverse foods that come from organic farms.
Lykke and CP….can you agree that organic farms are not the source of superbugs even though superbugs can sometimes be communicated through them?
Can you see the tragedy of this. The tragedy is that Monsanto and the FDA pushers get away with murder as superbugs are created by their drugs and CAFO systems but yet they are not held responsible for them!!! The FDA and drug pushers and CAFO system operators are violating the rights of free Americans and our right to a superbug free environment.
The FDA, CAFO systems and drug pushers are capital felony biologic trespassers. Can you appreciate this concept??? USDA organic standards prohibit antibiotic super bug creation conditions. Can you see this!! If we can agree on this…we can then agree on what happened to the victums of illness brought by superbugs.
I pray for a day that Asthma patients no longer die at 5200 per year and instead drink raw milk and no longer die. Good studies show this to be true….( PARSIFAL ) yet the drug industries deny its truths.
It is a sick care pofit paradigm…..prevention will be ignored…it is a challenge to profits.
Mark
That was cp’s comment, but listening to their stories, every one of them drank *grassfed raw milk* promoted by *WAPF* principles seeking better health. Where do you or WAPF describe what bodies (or superior immune systems) should drink or not drink raw milk?
"Spend a Day on the Farm"
"As the weather warms up, why not skip the supermarket and buy produce, eggs and milk at a farm instead? In addition to supporting local agriculture, its a chance to meet the folks who grow your food, take in cooking and gardening demonstrations – and see adorable baby animals! To find a farm near you, visit localharvest.org."
Coincidentally, I opened this up as soon as I got home from work, fresh out of the mailbox, on the way to pick up our milk. I had to chuckle. Published out of….New York!
Let me rephrase your question. Where do you or the FDA describe what bodies should be injected or not injected with vaccines? Hell you dont see WAPF and Mark mandating the consumption of raw milk.
Ken Conrad
http://jonnybowdenblog.com/warning-drinking-bottled-water-could-make-you-fat/
The above articles although of topic, they are relevant.
Raw milk producers aught to consider selling their milk in glass bottles. Better still consumers should avoid all foods packaged in plastic.
Ken Conrad
An effective protective immune system is a conscious effort done by awake people that take personal responsibilty.
Those people connect directly with conscious hardworking farmers for the source of their food. From your comments, I gather that a strong immune system is in direct conflict with your philosophies.
You are free to have a "pathogens welcomed here greeting poster" in your gut and a weak immune system. Raw milk consumers as a whole, refuse this notion and refuse illness and disease and are willing to earn their strong immune systems….. one cup of raw milk at a time.
Dr. Mercola sent this interview to 300,000 people today. You should listen to it.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/05/01/mark-mcafee-interview.aspx
Mark
For past 12 years I have stored (and sold) my milk in half-gallon mason jars; and I almost always refuse to buy food not sold in cardboard or glass for recycling reasons as well as health. I’ve also replaced my tupperware and other plastic containers with Anchor or Pyrex containers.
In any case, I make most of my own food anyway… homemade mayo, salad dressing, sour cream, yogurt, etc. So much better, tastier, cheaper and healthier than storebought…
I wanted to remind everyone that there are bloggers paid by big pharma and government who will get on a thread like this with the objective to discourage or side track this conversation. Their paid job is to attempt to discourage, confuse or sidetrack us.
I spotted comments by someone called Bob, NA… others… who seem like paid agents. They are easy to spot, and stick out from the people who genuinely care about raw milk and food freedom.
The infiltrator types will write back that my comments are far fetched conspiracy. But are they? If big pharma finds it lucrative to pay off a government official, it is probably pretty easy (and cheap) to hire a blogger to mess up a conversation.