At the raw milk symposium last week sponsored by the International Association for Food Protection, there was brave talk about “continuing the dialog” between those opposing raw milk consumption and the handful of individuals there, including Sally Fallon of the Weston A. Price Foundation, who are for it. (In the photo, Sally Fallon is shown chatting with Allen Sayler of the International Dairy Foods Association, the symposium’s moderator.)
The “anti” panelists who convened at the end of the day tried to signal their openness by considering alternatives to pasteurization.
The reality, though, is that the gulf between the two sides is very wide. A key reason it is so wide is that one of the main parties in the conflict, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s dairy division head, John Sheehan, refuses even to show his face at an event where “pro” reps like Sally Fallon are going to be present.
A big reason Sheehan refuses to show his face, I’m sure, is that he can’t begin to face up to the issues discussed following my previous post—that the raw milk debate opens up the much bigger issue of the role of nutrient-dense foods in strengthening our immune systems, and of processed foods in tearing immune systems down. The letter Phil Adams received from his congressman sounds like it was written from FDA propaganda.
Miguel captures the situation well when he states:
“The regulatory agencies attack the problem from the top. What regulations will put an end to these illnesses and make our food safe? They have identified the cause of these illnesses as an ever increasing list of ‘pathogens.’ So along with the war on terrorists, drugs, poverty, etc. we have the war on bacteria (bacteria, pathogens what’s the difference?) The weapons against bacteria are of course antibiotics, sanitizers, preservatives, herbicides, chemical fertilizers, pesticides etc.
”The grass roots movement toward a healthy life depends on bacteria to protect us from disease. We see them as allies indistinguishable from ourselves. Here is where we clash with the regulators. Their war on bacteria is threatening us and our children. It is also threatening them and their children. The grass roots movement will continue to grow like bacteria do, at an exponential rate, unless the regulators, afraid of defeat, reach for ever more powerful weapons in their war.”
Lykke is correct in pointing out the problems associated with education, but education won’t make progress if public health officials are disbelieving of the undelying message. The next big dairy event is the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments in Orlando, FL, April 17-22. Interestingly, Organic Pastures Dairy Co. owner Mark McAfee has written Sheehan proposing a meeting there: “I would like to meet with you and your team for a discussion so I can learn why it is that your FDA position is so absolutely dead set against raw milk when it is tested and regulated. In CA 420 stores carry raw milk and people are not dying. In fact people are rejoicing.”
Now, that would definitely be an interesting session to observe. But do you want to lay odds on Sheehan even attending this key dairy industry conference, let alone meeting with McAfee? I’d say the odds are he’ll chicken out once again, and maybe send an underling.
As a further indication of the wide gulf between pro and anti forces, there’s a new assessment out in one of Canada’s largest newspapers about the recent trial of Michael Schmidt on charges of illegally selling raw milk. It labels Schmidt’s cow share a way to “circumvent” the law. It compares raw milk to marijuana (ignoring the more apt comparison to alcohol). But the writer gives away his true ignorance at the end when he says, “The increasingly frequent outbreaks of food-borne illnesses such as listeriosis should remind us of … the need for regulation and consumer protection.” Uh, Monsieur Picard, it’s listeriosis in pasteurized milk that kills much more frequently than in unpasteurized milk; in fact, there wasn’t a documented case of listeriosis from raw milk (excluding chees) in the U.S. between 1973 and 2005.
It’s tough to begin discussing real issues like strengthening immune systems when the oppressors won’t talk, and disbelief among them prevails.
I have a good friend who is a PhD hydrologist, working with a government agency , who has verified this. It is a huge problem that the agencies do not want to even acknowledge let alone begin to deal with.
All the antibiotics that people are taking, whether properly prescribed or not are to some degree being peed out into the water supply, to say nothing of the unused remainders of prescriptions that are flushed down the toilet. The antibacterial soaps are going into this supply. It may be (this is speculation on my part) that some of the antibiotics people consume when they eat factory farmed meat, are also passing through into the water supply
So yes, we do need to do as much bottom up education and protective eating as we can, but it is hard to imagine that the situation won’t continue get worse unless this aspect is addressed as well.
It IS complex and circular because there are so many feedback loops involved and much as we would like a silver bullet, be it probiotic foods or putting increasingly large bubbles around ourselves, it just doesn’t work that way.
Anyone remember that old commercial that said "You can’t fool Mother Nature" ?
Time to take a measure of our progress. In 1972, Earl Butts, the Secretary of Ag under Nixon said…."when you hear the word Organic, think starvation!"
In 2002, Dr. Dan Glickman signed the USDA National Organic Plan into law.
It took 30 years for organics to become law. Thats quite a transition and political transformation.
John Sheehan is the E.Butts of 2009. The internet will shorten time and so will the exposure of the truth and the failing health of the sheepeople as they die off after consuming FDA lies in pill form.
So as we look into the mirror and the rear view mirror, I think we have made fantastic progress. We have framed the issues and the other side will not show up.
This is the greatest change that will face our nation. It is the origin of disease and how to prevent it. It is about our food origins and how humans will sustain life on earth. It is about that greater part of us we can not see or touch. It is about our immunity and bacteria.
We are making great progress….congrats. We only have about 15years to go to be marginally acknowledged if the internet works to shrink time by 50% ( I think it works faster than that ).
During that time….we will take the "FDA Germ Theory" paradigm apart little by little and replace it: sheepeople by sheepeople, immune system by immune system, vote by vote, dollar by dollar, sip by sip and cup by cup.
A great time to be alive and drink raw milk.
Mark
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-nutrition2-2009mar02,0,4757880.story
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/column/440669
China is the answer to Johns question. If TPTB have their way!
Last week I bought 2 5lbs boxes of frozen haddock to my dismay at home I saw that the raw product was from Norway BUT PACKAGED BY CHINA the store was kind enough to refund my money. Canned mushrooms are very hard to obtained that are not from China, nor any kitchen tool and on and on.
President Nixon traveled to China many years ago to an isolated closed enemy nation that was no real threat to us. He hailed the break thru! I wondered at the time why did he even want to open trade with them for surely only they would gain.
China now nearly owns us and TPTB are begging them to continue to buy our worthless unpayable debt.
Someone needs to tell our utterly blind leaders the answer to our nations food and monetary problems is not China and more debt or the USDA, FDA, NAIS, NAFTA, WTO,UN. The solution is to favor our own small farms and our ability to manufacture our own real products. The answer to our problems lies within the USA. But they will not listen.
while i deeply believe real food is vital to our health and well being, discussing milks roll in the vaccum it is currently held in is starting to seem futile and completely misguided.
what we need to be discussing is the real issue. our government needs to be recalled. we need to scrap all our federal reps and hold emergency elections to replace them all.
this has to be done soon.
we need to all declare ourselves as american patriots. and stop this madness in its tracks.
sign me, quickly losing faith in america.
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quotes_by/frank+zappa
"The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced."
"Government is the Entertainment Division of the military-industrial complex."
"In the fight between you and the world, back the world."
"The illusion of freedom [in America] will continue as long as its profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater."
"Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible."
"A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it is not open."
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe."
"I’m vile and perverted.
I’m obsessed and deranged.
I’ve existed for years but very little has changed.
I’m the tool of the government and industry too.
For I’m destined to rule and regulate you.
You may think I’m pernicious, but you can’t look away.
I’ll make you think I’m delicious with the stuff that I say.
I’m the best you can get… have you guessed me yet?
I’m the slime oozing out of your TV set…."
Quotes from Frank Zappa
Dan B.
From your link, "raw milk producers have to take extra care to prevent contamination of their milk, Bishop says. Sanitary conditions, attention to diet, milk testing and cattle health screening can help prevent contamination episodes, and researchers in Europe — where raw milk is widely used in cheese production — have pioneered protocols to help ensure that raw milk is pathogen-free, he says. ""They can have that [raw] milk coming off the farm with minimal bacteria — but it takes a lot more effort," Bishop says. "
This tells that the raw dairy producers are more sanitary and healthy than the factory feed lots. (duh) So it takes more effort to achieve that goal. What is Bishop’s point in his statement?
I can’t see it being about bacteria/pathogens. If the govt was so strongly against "pathogens" there would be some form of strict standards on all foods, especially those that have a greater potential of contamination, for example; hotdogs, lunch meats, etc. These places that have been proven to cause the greatest and most frequent food poisonings would be severely monitored and they are not. Peanutbutter is a good example, just 2-3 yrs ago it had an outbreak and now another. No, it isn’t about the bacteria/pathogens in the raw milk. Feedlot dairies cannot produce safe raw milk, so they wouldn’t be able to compete with the dairies like Claravale or OP.
The people of this country have forgotten what freedom is, and to the extent they run into it they fear it and trust the government. The paradigm shift from slavery to freedom is great. People need a story to get them there. Raw milk provides that story:
It exposes the futility of government regulation.
It exposes the utter corruption of government.
It exposes the bold tyranny of government.
It exposes the danger, futility, and corruption of the medical establishment.
It exposes the real harm the system has done to them and their own.
It causes them to make tangible life changes.
It presents a positive vision for the future. A vision in line with the way things used to be, the way we always wanted them to be but forgot about.
The important part of this vision is this: it is a positive change that sets up the alternative system to replace the present corrupt one.
There are always two big problems when dealing with tyranny: 1) convincing people the problem exists 2) providing tangible, useful actions for those who recognize the problem to take. Local food and raw milk provide this, if we are not co-opted.
And yes, they have contingencies should this little raw milk business get out of hand. We are just barely out of the ignoring stage.
"any enzymes the milk contains have no proven benefit for humans"
Tell that to the supposedly lactose intollerant who to their great joy discover they can drink raw milk. But we’re back to the old no studies show garbage; which, when put in opposition to tangible empirical experience is just a fraudulent argument from authority.
You know, now that we’ve seen the real harm pasteurized milk causes, and its utter inferiority compared to raw milk; there really isn’t any way it can ever hope to compete with raw milk in a free market. They have to suppress it.
Excellent point, Pete. Raw milk seems to provide a "story" on many levels. It is symbolic of various struggles with farming, government, society…regardless of what "side" one leans toward on the health implications (good or bad), I think somehow "raw milk" has become an example (symbol?) bigger things going on…
that’s why it is so important that raw milk become available to everyone who wants it…it’s a litmus test of our future….
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/environment/agriculture/news.php?q=1235862701
Not all of our chains are visable but all our chains result in slavery nonetheless. The UN recently stated there are now more slaves than at any time in human history and you can be sure the we and the American farmers were not included in their count. Debt is a form of slavery and no nation in history has ever been so indebted than our beloved land of the free.
Pete & Lykke,
I like your thought. I think you have noticed something that has drawn most of us to this blog. I would like to hear more. I would appreciate it if each of you (others too?) would elaborate.
David,
Another reason that the gulf between the two sides is so wide is that the anti group is very comfortable continuing to make a lot of money by keeping the rules just as they are. Ideology follows the money.
This link has some fantastic and thought provoking information. It ties into the discussion weve been having on this blog about immunity. Bottom line, if a mothers internal ecosystem of bacteria isnt balance she will not produce a baby with a healthy immune system.give the baby a few vaccinations with a weakened immune system and you have a disaster.
How do we connect the dots for future moms? A healthy immune system (meaning a healthy gut) is the foundation of health.
cp
It’s important to educate the people about a healthy immune system,but without more people producing the kind of food that encourages a healthy gut flora it will only lead to a lot of frustrated people.People need to be educated on how to produce the type of food that encourages a healthy immune system and then when they do begin to produce this food the regulators should get out of the way and let them.Michael Schmidt is a perfect example of a farmer who knows how to produce this food.Look at what they have done to him.
Even adults who have a fully developed immune system suffer damage to their immune systems by vaccines that bypass the normal route of infection by being directly injected into the muscle tissue.
Should Supermarkets Teach About Antibiotics?
Experts Want Pharmacies To Get Smart
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/healthsource/18800362/detail.html
Some supermarkets use flu season to get people interested in their free antibiotics programs.
But the Infectious Diseases Society of America wants the pharmacies to get smart about antibiotics, which will not help treat a viral infection such as influenza. They want the dispensaries to educate customers on when antibiotics can do more harm than good.
The group said, for instance, that overuse of antibiotics helps promote resistant strains such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, often called MRSA or the "superbug."
"Supermarkets have the power to protect their customers’ health," said Dr. Lauri Hicks of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "If they sought to educate people about when antibiotics work and when they don’t, they would be doing a great public service."
The CDC offers a "get smart" program to teach about proper antibiotic use.
If this refers to regulators, I still don’t think it is directly about the money such as bribes or pay out from industry. There is a type of person that gravitates to those government jobs – not all, but quite a few in those positions thrive on power and control (and little else)…they covet titles like "Chief," "Director." There is one place where money could play a role – some managers will move from the government after retirement into very sweet industry positions (in the same industry they used to regulate) at triple their government salary.
Antibiotics have also been over used in animals, contributing to growth of MRSA and VRE. If the feed-lots were abolished and animals raised in a natural environment, with naturaal food, perhaps the need of antibiltics would be rare.
Those animals are in our food chain and polluting the environment to include our water ways. It hasn’t been just humans over medicated with antibiotics. I don’t know which has been more over medicated.
I administered 17 flu vaccs last fall. Of those 17 patients, 9 have had the flu so far.
CP,
To educate people, maybe a comparison of foods showing what each ingredient does to the body. For example; yogurt, plain yogurt that has nothing added to it, you add your own fresh fruit and compare it to the processed yogurts, pick any brand; read and define the ingredients. It would be easy to see which would be healthier for you. In the past, I’ve heard people say that it wouldn’t be allowed in the food if it was harmful.
Are people willing to change? Are they willing to decrease the sugars? Learn to take the time to prepare foods instead of the convience of processed foods? It would entail a change in lifestyle.
I read Gut and Psychology Syndrome a few years ago. A very close friend of mine has an autistic child. I found the book on the internet and bought it for her. Her methods and philosophy are inline with U.S. DAN doctors who use the biomedical approach to treat autism. However, I think she is one of the first to publish the idea that a mothers poor gut health leads to a child with poor gut health, which then makes these children vulnerable for toxic overload. Chemicals transmitted from mother to baby also plays a negative role in the childs susceptibility to developing autism and ADD. Once you do reading on this topic and comprehend the big picture, it is quite frightening. I think in California 1 in 60 children have been diagnosed on the autistic spectrum.
The answerBefore a woman decides to become pregnant, she needs to detoxify her body, have her amalgam fillings removed and boost her gut with healthy bacteria. Kind of takes all the fun out of procreating. 🙂
cp
Steve,
To borrow your earlier phrase, that hits the nail on the flat spot. Your comment conjured up the image played over and over again in "our" office of the Chiefs grabbing their suit jacket, strutting by the rank-and-files in their cubicles making a point that they would be gone because of an important meeting with top industry officials, the press office, the legislative office, the governors staff, yada yada. It is all about power, ego, image. And the corruption is not "money," but when they take the informatin from the "cubie people," and twist/change it for their purposes. Maybe small farmers are like toys to them – a cat messing with a mouse/bird because it is easy prey and fun (and the behavior gains points with the other alley cats)? Not sure, just know that those "types" in public health care nothing about actual public health….and, it is darn near impossible to do anything about it.
Since were having such a nice discussion about gut health and the immune system, heres the story of more kids that suffered E.coli 0157:H7 and HUS after eating hamburger.
If you click on each childs picture, you can read a day by day description of their experience fighting the aftermath of ingesting this horrible bacterium.
We need education about gut health and prevention of pathogens in our food supply.
cp
http://www.scwist.ca/index.php/main/entry/bacteria-can-thwart-e-coli/
"At modern meat-processing plants, carcasses are currently exposed to a number of sanitation stepstheyre hit with hot blasts of steam, washed with a lactic acid wash and blast-chilled. While this process does a good job of eliminating pathogens, its not perfect, because dangerous strains of E. coli can still get through in some cases.
And all those sanitary steps can wipe out useful bacteria, including one strain of lactic acid bacteriatypically found in cheese and yogurtthat can compete with E. coli growth.
McMullen has been playing with this type of bacteria for close to two decades, trying it out on different meat products. Recently, she and her team isolated one kind that stops E. coli dead in its tracks.
By adding this bacteria to meat after it has gone through its sanitation steps, McMullen said, it will control any E. coli that managed to survive. Bacteria compete with each other. So when we take away the good ones, we may be giving E. coli a chance to grow better, she said. Im saying lets put the good ones back in and see if we can control E. coli.
The friendly bacteria could be added to a treated carcass, to a cut of meat or to a product ready to be packaged, she said. With ground beef, Id want to do it while it was grinding.
McMullens discovery is still a long way off from hitting the marketplace. The team will investigate how best to apply the friendly bacteria, how much might be needed, and what other effects could be produced. McMullen thinks it might help to reduce spoilage, which is also caused by bacterial growth. Regulatory approval is also expected to take time, but if everything goes well, consumers could soon be able to enjoy a rare hamburger without fear."
cp, the real problem continues to be the sanitizing that kills nearly all beneficial bacteria.As with antibiotic treatment,when the beneficial bacteria are eliminated,then the next step ,for the sake of safety,must be to reintroduce some beneficial bacteria to control the growth of those opportunistic bacteria that escape the sanitation step.Once the food safety people accept that a healthy community of lactic acid bacteria can prevent the growth of opportunistic bacteria,it doesn’t matter if a few "pathogens" might be in the meat or the milk as long as there are plenty of lactic acid bacteria to keep their numbers from increasing.The real test for safe food will become a test for a community of LAB that are strong enough to control any "pathogen".Balanced by a healthy community of lactic acid bacteria as in milk straight from a healthy cow,ecoli 0157:H7 is not a "horrible bacterium" it is just another harmless member of that community contributing to the variety that is necessary to maintain stability(health).
If you focus on prevention of "pathogens" by sanitizing everything you eat,then you become responsible to reintroduce all of the beneficial bacteria back into the food in the proper balance to build gut health.We simply don’t know enough to do this correctly.
If you focus on destroying bacteria,you will never achieve a healthy community of gut bacteria.If you focus on eating to build healthy gut bacteria,"pathogens" are just interesting, harmless bacteria not "horrible bacteria".
The big problem is that from the soil to the plate,at every step of food production,we are still focusing on "pathogens" as the enemy.The cry is that the BACTERIA are evolving into SUPERBUGS!.The truth is that the stronger the weapons we use against bacteria,the more damage we are doing to our beneficial bacteria.The bugs are not getting stronger,we are killing ourselves when we try to kill them.We are them.
Amanda, is it "feel" oppressed, or ARE oppressed? And when did it become antagonistic to demand basic human rights?
Today it is difficult to think of something you may go and do freely without government consent. Amazingy you cannot sell property or goods or services without it. And consent isn’t the end of it, for often "permission" carries a requirement to pay fees, and to act according to pre-established rules. Then in many cases, government refuses its citizens permission, even though what they wish to do is consitutionally legal. That is the case with raw milk in many states.
In America the fight against prior restraint in publishing has been fought vigorously and effectively. We have been far less vigilant when it comes to almost every other facet of our existence. Food, I suppose because it so foundational, has triggered a new fight against "prior restraint." Forced vaccinations, and forced participation in other forms of medical care, have been simiilar triggers. This is a very good thing for America, now that government seems able to limit constitutionally guaranteed freedoms with impunity.
Lykke (who is proving to be one of the more likable of the regulation-is-good-and-necessary folks) earlier wrote something to the effect that it will take a lot of "retraining" to get people off the junk food wagon. But wait a minute! What sort of government functions to "train" a populace to behave in this way or that? The answer: One that believes in prior restraint. I will argue with the likeable Lykke without qualms as long as her ideas limit constitutional liberty. (I am, after all, allowed to do that according to our constitution.)
Prior restraint is the enemy of individual, God-ordained liberty, the great friend of centralized control, and the current guiding light of American government and business. Pointing out that we citizens still have this or that "option" which others who were "textbook oppressed" (a phrase that really needs defining) is a loser’s game. Is it right to quietly watch freedoms drizzle away because someone else has even fewer? Who determines when the big line is crossed? How many degrees of slavery are acceptable?
I, for one, am hoping that all this fussing over raw milk will begin to turn the tide of central control, and begin to re-vivify the beautiful notion of self-government and individual rights.
It sounds like you might not have much use in a meeting with Sheehan. Carry on. Apparently, Mark McAfee and Sally Fallon have an interest in meeting him. If their goal is to change policy, I am recommending a less antagonistic strategy.
Amanda
The point is that Sheehan would not have much use in a meeting with me.
Dave
"What sort of government functions to "train" a populace to behave in this way or that?"
I agree, "train or re-train" the pbulic to choose better foods than junk wasn’t the best choice of words. I think I had "train on the brain" at the time I wrote that comment because there was a work project going on that involved training restaurant workers. Clearly, the more appropriate word would have been "educate."
Speaking of semantics, word choice…the use of "convert" in milk farmer’s comment in today’s post suggests to me "religion." Many do not care for the idea of being converted (saved from themselves?). Again, wouldn’t "educate" the lawmakers be the better word?
"anti group is very comfortable continuing to make a lot of money by keeping the rules just as they are. Ideology follows the money."
I used to include regulators as a whole in the anti- group. But, because of you and Regulator (where is he?) and others participating in the discussion here, Ive come to make a distinction between those at the top of the regulator hierarchy who maker policy within their sphere of influence and those below those who dont set policy, but rather only carry out policy indications from above.
I would include among the antis those groups I mentioned in a previous comment to you about changing diet decisions (Big Ag, Big Pharma, Big Med and some lawyers) as well as top regulators who regulate those Bigs.
Thank you for making me clarify.
PS I think that direct bribes or pay out from industry *could* happen, but for the most part is highly unlikely.
This open communication is wonderful – kudos to David to have a blog that promotes this exchange. I do not want to close it, but at the same time, must be open…kick me if you want to, but know that so-called "some laywers" are an inspiration for people sitting in their cubicles. We work hard to prevent more faces like these – regardless of source, ncluding raw milk:
Mediations to Occur in Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Cases Linked to 2007 E. coli O157:H7 Outbreak
http://tinyurl.com/cv75ya
Would you be open to considering that the presence of ecoli 0157:H7 in a food might not be the cause of these illnesses?Could it be the absence of the beneficial bacteria that would normally eliminate the ecoli?Or could it be the use of sanitizing methods or chemicals that kills nearly all bacteria but ecoli 0157:H7,leaving it plenty of room and nutrients to explode in population?When the current methods of making food safe are so obviously a failure how can you expect anyone to be happy with more of the same methods?
Your theory makes no sense when it comes to raw milk being contaminated. If the good bacteria in raw milk really balanced out the ability of E.coli 0157:H7 to grow in the milk and the human body, no one would become ill from contaminated raw milk. This is not the case, therefore your theory is just a theory.
cp
In the end we will all be consumed by the very organisms we have spend a lifetime trying to control and destroy. No one denies their existence. The germ theory on the other hand leaves us with many unanswered questions and therefore remains a theory nonetheless.
Ken Conrad
I assume that by "contaminated raw milk" you mean raw milk from which ecoli 0157:H7 can be cultured.To culture ecoli 0157:H7 from raw milk it is necessary to kill off the lactic acid bacteria in the raw milk(not theory ,fact).Obviously,if the milk contains ecoli 0157:H7 and something happens that kills off the lactic acid bacteria in the milk,it could cause illness.The question is:What happened that the lactic acid bacteria, which normally would eliminate the ecoli 0157:H7,were not able to do this?
There are many ways that lactic acid bacteria can be killed and many "pathogens" (your theory about germs) that can contaminate the air,water,food, skin, nose ,etc.
Does the blame for disease fall on a particular bacteria or on the process or chemical that removed the natural defense that keeps some bacteria from getting too numerous?
The "pathogen" is too weak to overpower our natural immune system of beneficial bacteria without some help.You are blaming the "pathogen" and ignoring the agent that disarmed the natural defense.Then in a futile attempt to eliminate the "pathogen" from every possible source,you advocate weapons that completely decimate our natural defenses.I hope that everyone will soon understand that strengthening our natural defenses rather than weakening them is the best strategy to follow.
How long does it take raw milk to kill off E.coli 0157:H7? Does it take an hour, a day, day 3 days, a week or longer? Does the process of cooling the milk quickly after milking interfere with the ability of raw milk to fight off pathogens quickly?
Im reading the Untold Story of Milk. Throughout history, the tradition in most cultures was to consume milk after it had been fermented. I wonder if some wisdom was passed down century after century regarding the consumption of fermented milk instead of milk straight from the cow? Have we lost this wisdom?
cp
The fermentation of milk begins soon after the cow is milked.Cooling the milk quickly slows down the process.When we drink a glass of fresh milk,it warms up to our body temperature,which causes the fermentation to proceed rapidly.Our digestion of fresh milk happens in the same way that cheese is made.The milk is warmed up,more lactic acid bacteria are introduced to it from our gut,enzymes like rennet are added.The fermentation continues rapidly at 98.6 deg.An hour or two is enough for the lactic acid bacteria to take over completely.
Milk will not ferment properly if the lactic acid bacteria are killed or inhibited in any way.In cheesemaking we watch the PH of the milk while it is fermenting to see if it falls to a certain level within a certain time.If it doesn’t act normally,we know something is wrong with the milk or the starter bacteria.If fresh milk makes someone sick it is because the balance between the lactic acid bacteria and the other bacteria is off.If a cow is sick or under stress it’s milk might be out of balance.Antibiotics or sanitizing chemicals will make the milk useless for making cheese and unsafe to drink.
Yes,people aren’t as smart as they used to be.