IMG_1456.JPGIf you look through the web site of the Centers for Disease Control for statistics on the number of food-borne illness occurring each year, you find different numbers—6 million, 14 million, 76 million. I was trying to pin the number down in connection with an article I wrote for The Boston Globe Sunday Magazine, published yesterday, and a CDC spokesperson who specializes in providing info on foodborne illness was firm: the CDC’s preferred number is 76 million.

This is the same CDC that provided data last year under a Freedom of Information request by Pete Kennedy of the Weston A. Price Foundation showing that between 1973 and 2005, the number of illnesses from raw milk never exceeded 351 in a single year (2001), and averaged 59 over those 33 years (in some years, there were no illnesses).

Now, the CDC statistics don’t tell us in either case how many victims are children, but let’s be very conservative and say iin the case of overall illnesses, t’s 10%. That would be 7.6 million children becoming sick from foodborne illness each year. Now let’s be off the wall and say that all the raw milk illnesses affect children (which is almost certainly not true). That’s 351 in a single year. Talk about orders of magnitude.

So when concerned citizen tells us breathlessly (following my post about the grand jury investigation into Organic Pastures) that because there were two outbreaks of illness in Washington from raw milk, we should outlaw raw milk for children, there’s a disconnect. I have no problem if concerned person won’t allow his/her children to eat cantaloupes or tomatoes or spinach—that’s everyone’s choice. But to suggest that raw milk is so much more dangerous than such foods and therefore should come be prohibited for children—like cigarettes and alcohol—has no rational basis.

I tried to explain all this in my article yesterday—that our public health and medical establishments continue to operate under assumptions stemming from outbreaks of illness a century and more ago. The reality today, thanks to refrigeration, improved sanitation, mechanization, and a serious commitment to quality by a segment of dairy farmers, is much different, and much less threatening.

The CDC doesn’t seem to know which foods cause the 76 million illnesses, but based on various studies, the main culprits are deli meats, hamburger, seafood, and various prepared foods from restaurants and fast-food outlets. I don’t hear anyone proposing to prohibit children from consuming any of these foods.

But the drumbeat against raw milk continues. Even without laws to the contrary, you have the medical and public health establishments trying to terrify parents from serving their children raw milk, or mothers from consuming it while pregnant. The result, as I describe in my Boston Globe Sunday Magazine article, is that parents lie to their doctors and otherwise try to low-key the fact that they serve their children raw milk.

On the other side of the issue, Massachusetts dairy farmer Terri Lawton (pictured above, shrouded by steam, cleaning her milk storage equipment) tells me that over the last two years, “One of the things I’m proudest of is that probably ten women got pregnant while drinking my raw milk and gave birth to healthy babies.” I think Dave Milano is onto something in his comment on my previous post that it’s difficult to deny the power of an idea.