# Raw Milk: Safer Than Leafy Green Vegetables!



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

http://www.natural--living.com/new-science-confirms-raw-milk-is-remarkably-safe.html

Looks like there is some new data out. It's really old data that many people have known for a long time, but now with new packaging. I'm sure someone will come on and start destroying the credentials of the people that published this, but the fact remains, raw milk is safer than fast food salad, by far, despite the active campaign waged for the last 50 years to prove how dangerous it is.


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

Raw milk is safe until it is not and a child ends up on dialysis - adults can choose but sorry I have to disagree if kids are involved. IF you grew up on a dairy farm drinking raw milk, your entire life-you may be fine but city folks do not have the tolerance for contamination. Louise Pasteur saved Millions of people from dying due to contaminated raw milk. Not my opinion; science fact.....I'm not saying fast food is any safer; and why we don't eat it&#55357;&#56860;


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

Our neighbors kids have drank it out of the tank their whole lives. Both of my kids wound up in the hospital with campylobacter food poisoning after drinking their milk. I had a moderate case of the runs. The idea of raw milk is great. I'm not personally taking a chance on it again.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Drinking out of a bulk tank is stupid. The whole premise of a bulk tank is stupid. One cow with one bad quarter can ruin thousands of gallons, or conversely 1 bucket of milk. A fleck of poo slung from a tail can ruin thousands of gallons, or one bucket. I will dump out my bucket, if it is questionable. Hired help forgets to wipe an udder before hooking up the machine, do you think they dump the whole bulk tank? Raw milk could never be safe, at a commercial level. But it is not as unsafe as many choices that are currently allowed. People should be allowed to make up their own minds.

Based on the number of Chrone's cases, I'm not sure that giving children commercial store-bought milk is any better for their welfare than giving them raw milk.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Good hygiene, modern understanding of pathogens, modern refrigeration, and good husbandry would have made Pasteur a jobless bum, if it had been present in his time.

You can't raise cows in a swill hole and without refrigerating the milk and expect to have a good. safe product, even with pasteurization.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

So raw milk is completely safe unless something that could make you sick is in it. ???


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

Adults can choose all they want. Children cannot. If you want your kids to be one of the 10-15 children on dialysis for life have at it. And This is just in the last 10 years. This borders on the edge of child endangerment.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

barnbilder said:


> Drinking out of a bulk tank is stupid. The whole premise of a bulk tank is stupid.
> ...
> Raw milk could never be safe, at a commercial level


Our neighbors run a cow share dairy and produce raw milk. It's their family business (hence a commercial enterprise) and they fill their jars from a bulk tank. How can that be both safer than vegetables but never be safe?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Big difference between raw milk and raw milk from a bulk tank. 15 kids on dialysis is not much compared to the number of people coming down with Chrone's. Feeding store-bought milk is closer to child endangerment than feeding raw milk. Giving people cultured cow poop from a bulk tank when they have never been exposed to anything is far from scientific evidence of inherent danger, should be more of a no-brainer. There are raw milk dispensers in the more modern countries, just like the high fructose cancer fountains we have here that people rot their obese children's teeth out with.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Here is an old article on Chrohn's disease,same pathogen as Johne's, which is carried by a high percentage of commercial dairy cows, and may not be able to be killed under modern pasteurization procedures.
http://www.wnd.com/2004/10/26829/


----------



## gone-a-milkin (Mar 4, 2007)

You are implying that Crohns is caused by pasteurized milk from the bulk tank?

Here is what the Mayo clinic has to say about the possible causes of Crohn's.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/crohns-disease/basics/causes/con-20032061

I will not get into an argument with you on this topic, since I have survived many different types of milk in my life.
Rather, I am grateful for a country life that allows me the freedom to choose what is right for my family. 
Not everyone has that luxury, unfortunate for them.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Here is more information that explains the dangers of pasteurized milk from the store.
http://www.notmilk.com/drgreger.html


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I would not consider the mayo clinic to be much of a source.


----------



## gone-a-milkin (Mar 4, 2007)

barnbilder said:


> I would not consider the mayo clinic to be much of a source.


 
Point taken.
You get your info from Natural News and WND.

Feel free to debate to your hearts content.
Simply show respect to others who may not share your views.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

The Mayo clinic is undoubtedly basing their information on tests that were done in a US college, in which the ultra-pasteurized milk samples were accidentally frozen for a while prior to analysis. The scientific question would be, does paratuberculosis persist in ultra-pasteurized milk, not ultra-pasteurized milk that has also been frozen. I wonder which food corporation gave that professor his scholarship? Wonder if his college room-mates work for the USDA?


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

So we've concluded that raw milk is safe, but also can never be safe and that everybody is a pawn of some shadowy conspiracy. Based on that knowledge, what should we do? What's your solution to the problem?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Drink raw milk. From a known and trusted source. Read research that comes from outside the US. Never take information circulated by the USDA, or FDA seriously. I mean, really, one of them says that lactoferrin, a naturally occurring component of milk, doesn't limit bacterial growth in milk, but the other one licenses it for use on meat and meat handling surfaces, to, get this, limit bacterial growth. How does that work, I wonder?

Conversely, if you have compromised your immune system with a diet of high fructose and partially hydrogenated garbage, to the point that common bacteria can cause a trip to the hospital, maybe you should stay away from anything dairy, or salad, or meat that hasn't been charred.


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

I'm moving to Ethiopia where the food is "natural" and therefore safer than the US&#55357;&#56860;


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Charred meat safer, too?
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/cooked-meats-fact-sheet
Milk from trustworthy people free of listeria and campylobacter?
Europe research is better?
Sugar compromises your immune system?
Some forms of fat proven to diminish immune system?
Johne's causes Crohn's?
Mayo Clinic is full of lies and Naturalnews is full of truth?
Dr. Mercola is full of truth?
Big businesses are bad, small operations are always full of virtue and always do the right thing.?
You can know more about the safety of raw milk by their honest face than from routine disease and bacteria testing? 

I had a thread about raw milk and posted reports from time to time. Most cases of food poisoning from raw milk goes either unreported, cases where Amish or herd-shares want to protect the producers or the evidence is lacking and cannot be verified. In this country raw milk consumption is uncommon. The daily consumption of raw vegetables is common. That sort of thinking makes walking on the moon safer than crossing the street. Then, to admit that a bulk tank is a caldron of disease while milk from trustworthy people is somehow safe is a puzzlement to me.
So far, every state that has legalized raw milk has seen an increase in reported illnesses from raw milk. Anytime an activity comes out of the shadows you get a better view of the problems.


----------



## sweetiepie (Apr 24, 2015)

I have a family milk cow and I would have to say that I feel completely safer drinking her milk then store bought. 
1.) I know exactly how she is. (Diseases, diet, how she is feeling.) 
2.) We have fresh milk everyday, less than 24 hours old. Anything older, gets given to other animals. Much harder for bacteria to grow. 
3.) No chemicals introduced from the bulk tank, bulk truck, and factory pasturizeation process. Yes they do add cleaning chemicals to the storage of the milk. Do we know what effect that has on us.
4.) But mostly I have the family cow because my son's allergies are almost non-existent when he drinks raw milk compared to the few months she is dried up for the next lactation. He has less colds, and flu then his classmates. I thought it was just a fluke but the same thing happens every year. 

I can not control, how others prepare store bought food but I can do my best here at home. There are recalls all the time on food. It is life, we can get sick or have accidents, we are mortal. I to am glad that I have a choice of what I feel is best for me and my family.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

sweetiepie said:


> I have a family milk cow and I would have to say that I feel completely safer drinking her milk then store bought.
> 1.) I know exactly how she is. (Diseases, diet, how she is feeling.)
> 2.) We have fresh milk everyday, less than 24 hours old. Anything older, gets given to other animals. Much harder for bacteria to grow.
> 3.) No chemicals introduced from the bulk tank, bulk truck, and factory pasturizeation process. Yes they do add cleaning chemicals to the storage of the milk. Do we know what effect that has on us.
> ...


You know how your cow is feeling? Do you know what she is thinking, too?:thumb:
Have you ever had her tested for any diseases or do you assume that a healthy looking cow cannot have Campylobacter, listeria, tuberculosis or Johne's? How often do you test? Ever had your cow's milk tested for bacteria? Would be an interesting experiment to take your cow's milk, let it rest for ten days in the 'fridge and take store bought milk, 10 days old and have each tested for bacteria.:yuck:

Many people believe that tying a few cloves of garlic around your neck reduces diseases, too. Far too many variables to assign raw milk to the root cause of your family's health. Being active and eating fewer processed foods might be a contributor, don't you think? Many people have speculated about raw milk having some sort of "good bacteria" or enzymes not found in pasteurized milk, but research has proven them wrong.

There are not cleaning chemicals added to milk.:hammer:

You and I agree that everyone should be allowed to drink the milk from their own cow. Fresher is almost always better. Raw milk for the general public is a bad idea.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss2XGxblNZY&feature=youtu.be[/ame]


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Gee what a sensationalistic thread title. Puts the Enquirer to shame.

But when you boil it down to the essence, it pretty much says, getting shot with a .22 is safer than a 30-06, doesn't it?

In spite of the risks, I think people should be free to choose raw milk. Anyone selling raw milk should be required to put a big bold label on the container that explains the risks. We all know the health risks of liquor and tobacco, yet they are sold every day with a warning label. 

If more raw milk were sold, would dairy operations have an incentive to tighten up and try harder, knowing there would be no pasteurization to cover up their sanitation shortfalls? 

It is a small segment of the population who wants to drink raw milk. It is an even smaller segment willing to produce it and sell it to them. So if there is an outbreak, it is a lot smaller than it would be from an "industrial scale" operation whose products could be spread over most of the country. 

There is risk, no denying that, but as long as people are informed, it's an acceptable level of risk, IMHO. Sure it breaks your heart when something happens to a kid, but it does every day from all different kinds of risks. Some poor kid doing "bat boy" duty got killed at a ball game this weekend, struck in the head with a bat when he ran past the "on deck" hitter. Shall we outlaw just bat boys, or ban baseball altogether? Life simply can't be lived without risk.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Most of the scary diseases that people like to throw out, like e. coli, campylobacter, and listeria, are soil or feces born. If you live on a farm, and you are worried about pasteurizing your milk to protect your children, don't be foolish. They have already been exposed. And yes, you can look at an animal and see how it's feeling, particularly if it has listeriosis. The 4 in the morning minimum wage hired help at a mega dairy, maybe not so much. The biggest thing is, keep poop out of the milk, and get it either cultured or refrigerated quickly. People can choose to buy beer. Loaded with carcinogens, known to cause death to unsuspecting bystanders, and cause societal woes, but people can't choose to drink raw milk. If the USDA worshippers would have their way.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

Nobody here has said you shouldn't have the choice to drink milk. In fact, I think we all agree you can drink it straight from the teat, if you wish. Your original post and the article it links to say that raw milk is safe and absolutely nothing about at what size of an operation it becomes unsafe. It clearly, simply states it is safe. (Although, the article also states that there is still risk.) Then you said that at a commercial scale, (however many cows that is) it can never be safe because all hired employees are incompetent and you can't mix milk from multiple cows in a bulk tank. It's really a genius way to win a debate - taking both sides.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Raw milk can contain listeria, right from the inside the teat.
Raw milk can contain campylobacter, right from inside the teat.
Raw milk can be contaminated by e coli, right from the teat.
Raw milk can contain salmonella from inside the udder.
Raw milk can contain tuberculosis right from inside the udder.

The bacteria listed above often show no outward signs of illness in the cow. These bacteria can be found in beef and chicken as well as in the soil. 

Drink all the raw milk you want. Make up all the health benefit myths you want, pretend it is safer than spinach, peanut butter and cantaloupes. 
But don't tell me those bacteria don't exist in raw milk or that they are only found on dirty udders, manure and soil.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5644a3.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5424a4.htm


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Every choice we make in life comes down to evaluating risks vs benefits.

For choosing raw milk: risks include the fairly remote chance that a pathogen is ingested and a serious illness ensues. The benefit of drinking raw milk: ZERO physical health benefit, but some degree of mental health benefit to the poorly informed TreeHugger types.

When choosing raw milk, remember the problem of incubation time. Consuming the product immediately, even if contaminated, will probably result in the ingestion of an inocculum too small to cause problems. But let it sit for a while and the bugs multiply and illness is more and more likely to occur. 

For that reason, direct sales from the farm to the table is acceptable, if you insist, but sales via a remote store is asking for trouble. We should all have the right to be stupid. But some people abuse the privilege.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Sorry to those that enjoyed the up dates, I haven't been keeping up with the reports of proven illnesses from raw milk. But if you are interested, http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/sp...es-again-dont-read-if-you-dont-want-know.html is a good read.

If your mind is made up and facts just undermine your beliefs, please avoid reading this. It might bother me that someone went to their grave angry about my thread on raw milk.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

When I was a public health officer, I used to give a briefing in the military that sums up our food safety policy:

MAKE SURE THE FECES IN YOUR FOOD IS COOKED!!

So, yes, I agree with haypoint. You should raise your cows in filthy, crowded conditions, and make sure you cook the feces in the milk.

Here is the dairy near my folks which illustrates how you are to do it, all government approved. Wonder why they don't put this image on the milk carton? Guess they want to perpetuate the myth of cows out grazing in a clean environment.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I've been a dozens of dairy farms in Michigan. Many are large operations with thousands of cows. To manage these large numbers effectively requires management and infrastructure. These places are designed to be cleaned often. 

I'm sure that somewhere there is a dry lot, group of dry dairy cows, standing around and in between piles of ready to spread manure. To the uneducated, those cows look like milk cows.

The worst farms I've been in were the small operations, milking under 60 cows. Those operations couldn't generate the cash flow to afford expanses of level concrete and skid steer equipment to keep up with the manure.

Every large dairy is very concerned about keeping their milk bacteria level very low. This is done with modern, easy to properly clean equipment, frequent manure removal and clean udders.
Maximum milk production comes from proper nutrition and maintaining healthy cows. 

I am not saying that every large operation is perfect and every small operation is filthy. I wish the opposite were true. But in my experience, your concept of what a large operation does isn't true.

You have a photo of what looks like a large lot with piles of manure. I have photos of a raw milk dairy pasture that is filthy. Now what? Meaningless.

I wish everyone could be around a few cows long enough to know that even when clean straw bedding is available, cows will lay down in manure. Then after you see the difficulty keeping a few cows clean, go to a large dairy and see what a good job they do managing waste and keeping cows clean. Perfect? Nope. But I think it is a whole lot better than you imagine it to be.

If you are comparing a modern thousand cow dairy to a backyard operation where the cows are milked into a pail, the opportunities for bacteria contamination into the milk pail is a hundred times greater. Herd share raw milk operations tend to be the smaller farms without the most modern sanitary equipment.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

DJ in WA said:


> So, yes, I agree with haypoint. You should raise your cows in filthy, crowded conditions, and make sure you cook the feces in the milk.


That's quite a bit of a stretch.

You took a picture of a bad farm and extrapolated that to every dairy farm to fit your narrative. If this is the only large dairy you've ever seen, then you need to get out more.

If we shut down every industry that has a bad actor, we would all just be sitting at home doing nothing, because there's bad actor in every single industry on the planet. Doesn't make it right, but it is what it is.

My experience with dairies is the opposite. The large dairies I've been to are cleaner than the smaller ones for exactly the reason Haypoint states. They have more money (or probably debt) to have the infrastructure to handle the manure. The one in the picture is bad. I don't agree with animals standing in piles of manure. That farm should be closed in my opinion. To say that's what all large farms are like is just plain false.


----------



## 258Pots (Apr 23, 2015)

barnbilder said:


> Most of the scary diseases that people like to throw out, like e. coli, campylobacter, and listeria, are soil or feces born. If you live on a farm, and you are worried about pasteurizing your milk to protect your children, don't be foolish. They have already been exposed. And yes, you can look at an animal and see how it's feeling, particularly if it has listeriosis. The 4 in the morning minimum wage hired help at a mega dairy, maybe not so much. The biggest thing is, keep poop out of the milk, and get it either cultured or refrigerated quickly. People can choose to buy beer. Loaded with carcinogens, known to cause death to unsuspecting bystanders, and cause societal woes, but people can't choose to drink raw milk. If the USDA worshippers would have their way.


People need "complications", people need to "feel" safe...

They will NEVER understand what you are saying, they life in a paradigm, neither you or I recognize as based in reality, but they see it, I don't either. I used to drink mountain dew, all the hfcs, and bromine too. I didn't know I was poisoning myself, they sell it as "food", it's simply not "food", it's a mild poison, just like the other 98% of the grocery store...

You can try to tell people that, they won't ever believe, they will take their "maintenance" prescriptions for life. I was spending over $12,000 a year on prescriptions alone, Advicor, Abilify, Depakote, Androderm, Zoloft, and Wellbutrin (all lifetime maintenance scripts). After a lot of research I got off everything and went after gut biome(this have not been an easy year). Just had a cholesterol screen the other day and everything is normal, I ate over 10 pounds of pork fat in the previous two months, along with many pounds of butter...

Gut Biome, if you don't have this you are sick, I suspect very few people have a good populated gut biome...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/290747.php


I cured my depression, and high cholesterol so far...

There isn't anyway to measure or any books on how to build a gut biome, I did it by minimizing toxins, while maximizing nutrition, there are many "foods" that I know now are not "food.

Here is what I avoided:
Corn: not food, not even a good feed, promotes fat in animals/humans.
Soy: same as corn, I will not eat ANY soy or corn or anything made from or fed those items, if you take one thing from my post get all corn and soy products out of your diet. I might eat the sweet corn my wife is growing, but I will know there is zero nutrition in it...

Wheat (at first, you can introduce ancient grains once you establish a gut biome, but even then in moderation)

Commercial dairy and meat- all fed corn and soy, homogenized dairy products.

I eat hunted, and pasture raised pasture finished animals, with zero antibiotics.

No medicines, ZERO, any medicine will kill off the gut, yes an aspirin kills it. NSAIDS=most dangerous drug in america...

Yes, I have to plan to eat, everything has to be made, other than a carrot or cuke out of the fridge most everything needs to be prepared. My lovely wife who weighs in at 125-130 and is quite slim, dropped to 115 and has more strength and energy that ever before. I went from 320 pounds to 198 and dropped six prescriptions, and have the best health of my life.

Two years ago I would have read a post like I just wrote and I would have thought "that guy is an idiot", well that guy is living healthier than ever...

Here is my 60 year old wifes legs, 61 in October, can you say "farm girl sexy"???


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

A little off-topic, but I don't doubt the health benefits you've experienced. My cousin is a very prominent doctor who has spent his career doing research and getting hundreds of people off of medications and controlling weight and other health issues through diet alone. His best "nutshell" advice that most people could follow without too much pain is to cut out soda, any added sugar (#1), processed foods, wheat, and empty carbs. There's more to it than that, but those are the biggest bang for the buck. Eat all the meat, vegetables, nuts, fat you want, a very little fruit now and then. Pretty simple and I agree with all of it.

The problem is that people don't want that. They want fast food, bread, sugar, donuts, cheap, etc. And if that causes health problems, I'll take a pill. So, how do we get people to stop eating that way and eat only what's good for them? People are stupid; they won't do it on their own. So, the government tells them what to eat (or tells people what they can eat by controlling what producers can make) and we're right back to where we are: government is always bad and can't tell me what to do.


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

cooper101 said:


> That's quite a bit of a stretch.
> 
> You took a picture of a bad farm and extrapolated that to every dairy farm to fit your narrative. If this is the only large dairy you've ever seen, then you need to get out more.
> 
> ...



So now we don't like extrapolation? Haypoint selects disease outbreaks from raw milk, and suddenly all raw milk is dangerous, right? Apparently the beef cows I have laying out in the grass that I steal a quart a day from are just as dangerous as the filthy dairies, right?

Sure there are cleaner dairies than what I showed. That just happens to be the one I pass by regularly. My point is that nobody is starting threads bashing dirty dairies, but only that the feces in the milk from them should be cooked. I also don't see laws on dairy sanitation, and haven't seen stories of cops swooping in to shut down dirty dairies like they do with raw milk.

It is also amusing that Haypoint accuses the raw milk folks of spreading myths, and ignoring facts, while he fails to acknowledge the myths spread about the dairies producing pasteurized milk. Why don't they put pictures of cows in dry lot (or wet lot) dairies on the milk carton? Because they want people to believe the myth of dairy cows out frolicking in the pasture with bees buzzing around them.

It is also harder to keep the modern mega-sized udders clean than it is my beef cows' udders. One reason the high producers have more teat injury and mastitis, and one reason dairy cows only have 2 to 3 productive years.

I won't get into the high carbohydrate diet of dairy cows, and the effects that has, with borderline acidosis, etc.

The primary motive of the industry is not health of humans or cows, but economics. It is cheaper to keep cows on dry lot and feed more grain, and to pasteurize milk. Just like the feedlots that make more money stressing calves when shipping and treating the resulting disease, then feeding high levels of grain, which cattle don't handle well, leading to acidosis, rumen ulceration, and liver abscesses, the levels of which are reduced by feed additives. 

And if we were to hear all the facts, alongside reports of illnesses from raw milk, we would get the reports of illnesses from pasteurized milk. Yes, raw milk may be more dangerous, but with complete information, consumers could compare relative risk and make decisions, just like they do every day when choosing which mode of transportation, etc.

Since haypoint cherry-picks the diseases he reports to fit his biases and beliefs, he perpetuates the myth that pasteurized milk is incapable of causing illness. Pasteurizers can fail, pipelines and containers can be contaminated post-pasteurization, etc. And with mass production and distribution, one point of contamination can affect a large population. And with wide distribution, scattered cases of illness can be harder to detect, skewing the numbers in favor of pasteurize milk.

So, yes, I agree we should get all the facts out there, and end the myths. Give the consumer all the information. Put a photo of the dairy of origin on the milk carton.


----------



## Lady89 (Feb 22, 2014)

Raw milk is in the same class of food as raw honey. It is perfectly safe for health adults (and has some good probiotics that can keep you healthy) but it should not be eaten by the immune deficient, or young children. And it can definitely give you the runs if u are not used to it.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

&#8220;So now we don't like extrapolation? Haypoint selects disease outbreaks from raw milk, and suddenly all raw milk is dangerous, right? Apparently the beef cows I have laying out in the grass that I steal a quart a day from are just as dangerous as the filthy dairies, right?&#8221;
_I didn&#8217;t select anything. People got sick from raw milk and those were the bacterial infections that put them in the hospital. Never said all raw milk was dangerous. Just willing to admit that those healthy looking cows in your pasture could have dangerous bacteria in them and in their milk. Doesn&#8217;t seem that you accept that._

&#8220;Sure there are cleaner dairies than what I showed. That just happens to be the one I pass by regularly. My point is that nobody is starting threads bashing dirty dairies, but only that the feces in the milk from them should be cooked. I also don't see laws on dairy sanitation, and haven't seen stories of cops swooping in to shut down dirty dairies like they do with raw milk.&#8221;
_Nobody is starting threads bashing dairies because it isn&#8217;t any of our business. There are safeguards in place to insure food safety. While uncommon, commercial dairies do get shut down for sanitation reasons. The milk processor stops buying their milk and the problem is solved. I think you are referring to a commercial operation that kept selling tainted cheese violating court orders.
_
&#8220;It is also amusing that Haypoint accuses the raw milk folks of spreading myths, and ignoring facts, while he fails to acknowledge the myths spread about the dairies producing pasteurized milk. Why don't they put pictures of cows in dry lot (or wet lot) dairies on the milk carton? Because they want people to believe the myth of dairy cows out frolicking in the pasture with bees buzzing around them.&#8221;
_What commercial dairy myths are you talking about?
_
&#8220;It is also harder to keep the modern mega-sized udders clean than it is my beef cows' udders. One reason the high producers have more teat injury and mastitis, and one reason dairy cows only have 2 to 3 productive years.&#8221;
_Yup, those tiny teats and small udders on your hairy cows are easier to keep clean. Commercial dairies must work hard to keep teats and udders clean. Go to a livestock auction and actually see the cull cows from a commercial dairy. Generally, they are older cows. Often cows are culled due to milk production not mastitis._

&#8220;I won't get into the high carbohydrate diet of dairy cows, and the effects that has, with borderline acidosis, etc.&#8221;
_Well, I&#8217;m glad you won&#8217;t, because that myth about e coli levels is a dead horse we should all be tired od beating. It deserves its own thread_.

&#8220;The primary motive of the industry is not health of humans or cows, but economics. It is cheaper to keep cows on dry lot and feed more grain, and to pasteurize milk. Just like the feedlots that make more money stressing calves when shipping and treating the resulting disease, then feeding high levels of grain, which cattle don't handle well, leading to acidosis, rumen ulceration, and liver abscesses, the levels of which are reduced by feed additives.&#8221;
_Many things have an economic motive. Just not enough Mother Theresa giving selflessly to run the economy. Stress doesn&#8217;t cause disease. If there is already a disease, stress can exacerbate it. Most illnesses during shipping is caused by the high level of pathogens that the animal had never been exposed to. Start your own thread if you want to beat up on corn fed cattle._ 

&#8220;And if we were to hear all the facts, alongside reports of illnesses from raw milk, we would get the reports of illnesses from pasteurized milk. Yes, raw milk may be more dangerous, but with complete information, consumers could compare relative risk and make decisions, just like they do every day when choosing which mode of transportation, etc.&#8221;
_Are you saying that people are getting sick from pasteurized milk and that information is being hidden from the public? That is just not true and to insinuate it is true creates more misinformation. Making rational decisions requires knowing the facts. Seems too many believe healthy looking cows produce healthy safe milk. That&#8217;s just not true._ 

&#8220;Since haypoint cherry-picks the diseases he reports to fit his biases and beliefs, he perpetuates the myth that pasteurized milk is incapable of causing illness. Pasteurizers can fail, pipelines and containers can be contaminated post-pasteurization, etc. And with mass production and distribution, one point of contamination can affect a large population. And with wide distribution, scattered cases of illness can be harder to detect, skewing the numbers in favor of pasteurize milk.&#8221;
_I don&#8217;t cherry pick. I provided news reports about actual events and what the Health Department in each state discovered. You are right, failed pasteurizers do not produce pasteurized milk. Out of the billions of glasses of milk produced, such events are almost unheard of. With mass production, tainted milk would produce mass illnesses, making such an event easy to detect. Go to a milk processing plant and see the safeguards and view the constant testing being done to insure safe milk._ 

&#8220;So, yes, I agree we should get all the facts out there, and end the myths. Give the consumer all the information. Put a photo of the dairy of origin on the milk carton.&#8221;
_I suppose you want slaughterhouse kill floor photos in the meat case, photos of a molting chicken&#8217;s vent on your egg carton, photo of a Port-a-John in a vegetable field on your green beans, a photo of a rendering truck on your lipstick and a rack of puppy mill cages in your pet store?_
_Believe it or not, I&#8217;m no fan of commercial dairies. I wish every dairy had 40 cows and people were making a living wage doing it. But disparaging the highly automated dairy operations because you want the world to be different from what it is doesn&#8217;t make sense. Nostalgia is great. But believing that old fashion is always safer, cleaner, more wholesome and healthy is like believing in the Easter Bunny._


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Lady89 said:


> Raw milk is in the same class of food as raw honey. It is perfectly safe for health adults (and has some good probiotics that can keep you healthy) but it should not be eaten by the immune deficient, or young children. And it can definitely give you the runs if u are not used to it.[/quote
> 
> Yup.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/08/05/more-than-380-in-us-sickened-by-cilantro-linked-infection/
380 people sickened by feces parasite tainted Mexican vegetable. I guess he's right, raw milk is safer.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Most of the raw milk illness data includes "bathtub cheese" made by foreign people living in near third world conditions. The powers that be are too skeert to make pertinent data on raw milk from animals raised on pasture, kept clean, tested for disease, not pooled together from a bejillion animals, refrigerated quickly, in sanitary conditions by competent and informed, experienced farmers concerned with their reputation. 

Cows udder contains all sorts of things, so do humans. Doesn't mean you get sick until the bad outnumber the good. When bossy is blowing squirrel lungs into the bucket, there are probably more bad than good. Best to use that on the tomatoes instead of sending it down a mile of pipe to ruin every other cow in the tank's milk. I don't care how much you cook it, or what the somatic cell count is in the whole tank. It's bad milk, bad milk does bad things, good milk does good things. Nobody is advocating force feeding raw milk to orphans with HIV. Only questioning laws that make selling a quart to our neighbor, (which through their own quest for information they may wish to pasteurize themselves), similar to laws about selling crystal meth.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

It is not a illness caused by the ingestion of raw milk until there is a link. That is often a sample from the patient, a sample of the milk in their refrigerator and a sample from the dairy, all with a matching genetic "fingerprint" positively linking things together. Without that there is no reportable illness caused by raw milk. Generally, by the time a person is hospitalized, the Health Department notified, the authorities take action, the jug of milk is gone, the bulk tank cleaned and there is no link.
However, with cheeses, the link exists. 
Clearly, people, employing third world sanitation methods, making cheese in their homes, also known as bath tub cheese, poses a health hazard. 
While many more suspected illnesses come from drinking raw milk, it is far easier to track and prove illnesses from cheese, because the evidence remains available longer than a jug of milk. So, home processed cheese gets reported more often, because it is easier to prove, raw milk is suspected in far more incidences, but generally not reported because of a break in the evidence stream.

The inspectors working to keep US foods the safest in the world, don't care what sanitation you employ for yourself and your family. You can butcher chickens on the picnic table, spread litter box waste in your vegetable garden and can fish in a water bath canner.
But as soon as you want to market any risky product, you must meet standards that are set up to protect the public, reduce risk and maintain confidence in the food chain. 
When people violated those standards, like with the tainted spinach, tainted strawberries, tainted cantaloupes, tainted peanut butter and tainted hamburger, those producing a wholesome product suffered. A drop in consumer's confidence results in a lasting drop in income. I don't think it fair for your desire to sell your raw milk in the open market to jeopardize the income of hard working families that are following the rules and producing a wholesome safe product.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Most of us form our opinions on real life experiences and things they have actually seen. Some may wonder why I spend so much time defending dairy farms and opposing commercial raw milk sales.

I was a part of the "Back to the Land movement" of the 1970s. I saw a lot of folks learning about subsistence farming. I know that a tiny operation generally cannot retail products as fresh as a large operation. When someone has 6 hens and can sell you three dozen eggs, I'd be a fool to believe they were as fresh as the eggs in the grocery store. When your income depends on marketing every bit of milk on a regular basis, I know what is often done when a chunk of dried manure falls into the bucket. You scoop it out and keep milking. These examples are not how I wish things to be. They are not how I once believed things to be.

I've argued for the traceability of livestock. RFID has made quite a stir. Here in Michigan we had to tag our cattle as a way to maintain our TB free status. Even though TB is found in the NE part of the state, everyone has to do it. Sort of hard to "sell" that idea to the folks raising cattle far from the TB zone.

16 months ago, a USDA inspector found evidence of TB in a cow at a slaughter facility. Because of those controversial RFID ear tags, the cow was traced back to a farm 200 miles away from any known TB outbreaks. I figured it was a mistake, either it wasn't TB or the ear tag was mixed up with a cow from the TB zone.
All the cattle, 750, were tested for TB. This farm raises their own replacements and the only new cattle brought onto this farm was a new bull, bought from a neighbor down the road. The cows looked healthy, milk production was good. This family operated dairy was doing everything right. Mom, Dad and two teenage boys worked hard to grow this business. The annual production of 700 or so calves were sold to a cattle broker.
The cows were infected with TB. The raw milk they sold to the neighbors for their calves was infected and infected their neighbor's cattle. The family, drinking from their own bulk tank were infected. Their dog and cats were infected.
The majority of the cows were due to freshen shortly, so when the herd was disposed of, they didn't get paid the value of a quality milking cow, but the value of a non-milking dry cow. The loss of milk income and reduced payment for their herd, combined with the ongoing payments for equipment and mortgage, quickly put them out of business.
This heart breaking situation shows me that even with the best intentions, healthy looking cows can spread disease.
BTW, as soon as the TB was discovered, the milk processor stopped buying their milk, even though pasteurization would kill tuberculin bacterium. 

So, if you think "squirrel lungs" (whatever that is) is going into a commercial bulk tank, you don't know much about grade A milk production. If you believe that fresh air, clean bedding and a shiny coat is proof of safe healthy raw milk, you are fooling yourself. 
Better to buy some calves to drink up your excess milk than to risk getting sued by a neighbor over some tainted milk, IMHO.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Been drinking raw milk for years. Kids started 3 years on raw cows milk now we milk our own goats abs drink only goats milk. Raw. We also sell it on herd shares and have had zero problems from anyone. Keep it clean and your as safe as you can be. Zero harm can come from clean raw milk.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Been drinking raw milk for years. Kids started 3 years on raw cows milk now we milk our own goats abs drink only goats milk. Raw. We also sell it on herd shares and have had zero problems from anyone. Keep it clean and your as safe as you can be. Zero harm can come from clean raw milk.


Zero harm? Did you read the post about the family infected with TB? Plus the neighbor's herd they infected? Their milk was clean. No sign of anything wrong. Do you think the folks that sold raw milk to the public knew the milk had high levels of Campylobacter? It looked like clean raw milk. 
Great, I know people that have consumed raw milk for decades. Seems safe. I also know people that drive drunk and never had an accident. Does that prove anything?
If your family gets sick or is hospitalized, oh well. If your herd share customers get sick or are hospitalized, your herd share agreement might keep them from suing your farm away from you. What concerns me is that the public might get the mistaken idea that clean looking raw milk is zero risk.
Careful attention to animal health, regular testing for disease and bacterial levels, clean modern milking equipment and rapid refrigeration and cold storage is important, too.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

haypoint said:


> Zero harm? Did you read the post about the family infected with TB? Plus the neighbor's herd they infected? Their milk was clean. No sign of anything wrong. Do you think the folks that sold raw milk to the public knew the milk had high levels of Campylobacter? It looked like clean raw milk.
> Great, I know people that have consumed raw milk for decades. Seems safe. I also know people that drive drunk and never had an accident. Does that prove anything?
> If your family gets sick or is hospitalized, oh well. If your herd share customers get sick or are hospitalized, your herd share agreement might keep them from suing your farm away from you. What concerns me is that the public might get the mistaken idea that clean looking raw milk is zero risk.
> Careful attention to animal health, regular testing for disease and bacterial levels, clean modern milking equipment and rapid refrigeration and cold storage is important, too.


We vet check twice a year and strip test our milk monthly as well as clean milking and processing area. We also have a closed air milker. Our milk doesn't see air into its bottled right beside the fridge. Cleanliness and health make all the difference in the world.


----------



## dizzy (Jun 25, 2013)

I'll admit to not knowing a lot about dairy cows, but isn't there a test that would have showed that bull had TB? And, don't people have a vet check out the animal B4 buying?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

It's really easy to test for TB and also pretty easy to quarantine new animals that haven't been tested. (We have tested since 1994.) I think if someone was worried about catching the TB, it would be much more likely to catch TB from one of the thousands of undocumented immigrants that are pouring into our country. Some of which, of course end up employed to pick leafy green vegetables, as in regard to the original topic.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Haypoint- "When someone has 6 hens and can sell you three dozen eggs, I'd be a fool to believe they were as fresh as the eggs in the grocery store."

Very little real life experience speaking here. Storebought eggs are often very old. You can float test them and tell. You can also hard boil them and tell. That's the problem when cusip asset managers try to argue their click and paste life experience with actual farmers. 6 hens could lay three dozen eggs in six days. There is not a six day old or fresher commercial egg anywhere near a store shelf. If you made deviled eggs, you would know this.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

barnbilder said:


> It's really easy to test for TB and also pretty easy to quarantine new animals that haven't been tested. (We have tested since 1994.) I think if someone was worried about catching the TB, it would be much more likely to catch TB from one of the thousands of undocumented immigrants that are pouring into our country. Some of which, of course end up employed to pick leafy green vegetables, as in regard to the original topic.


Well there ya go. You wouldn't test for TB if you didn't accept there was a risk of your cows having it. Kudos for the good management.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

MO_cows said:


> Well there ya go. You wouldn't test for TB if you didn't accept there was a risk of your cows having it. Kudos for the good management.


Everything comes with risk. You risk dieing every single day you open your eyes, drive a car or eat a potato chip. With livestock you always take steps for better health. Testing whenever necessary.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Probably wouldn't test if it wasn't required for crossing state lines. Can't sell any milk, have to rely on fair premiums to make a living. Hey lets go pen our animals next to animals from two states away. But it's safe, they always send the state vets to the fair, they are so good they can look at an animal and actually see potential pathogens incubating. Plus, you have to have a vet certificate every thirty days, in which time you could hit four or five fairs in as many states. TB in milk occurrences went way down when people with TB quit coughing in the bucket.

But yes, raw milk, if it scares you, you should probably also stay away from bagged salad, amusement park rides, motor vehicles and doctors.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Everything comes with risk. You risk dieing every single day you open your eyes, drive a car or eat a potato chip. With livestock you always take steps for better health. Testing whenever necessary.


You should always take steps for better health, yes. But there are people posting on here who don't believe in vaccinations or antibiotics, why would they test if they don't intend to treat, so don't assume everyone has your standards.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

barnbilder said:


> Haypoint- "When someone has 6 hens and can sell you three dozen eggs, I'd be a fool to believe they were as fresh as the eggs in the grocery store."
> 
> Very little real life experience speaking here. Storebought eggs are often very old. You can float test them and tell. You can also hard boil them and tell. That's the problem when cusip asset managers try to argue their click and paste life experience with actual farmers. 6 hens could lay three dozen eggs in six days. There is not a six day old or fresher commercial egg anywhere near a store shelf. If you made deviled eggs, you would know this.


All I can base my statements are the facts of my real life experiences. The grocery stores around here receive eggs daily. The eggs are shipped out of Herbrick's facility every hour throughout the day. 
Eggs are conveyor collected as the hens lay them. They are inspected and packaged. There is no "egg warehouse". Just delivery trucks. 
In my experience, eggs purchased in local grocery stores are often less than 24 hours away from falling out of the hen and rarely over 48 hours old. 
Please don't take my word for it. Ask the manager at the grocery store. 
The brighter yoke color and less runniness of back yard flocks isn't a measure of freshness as it is diet and production levels.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

dizzy said:


> I'll admit to not knowing a lot about dairy cows, but isn't there a test that would have showed that bull had TB? And, don't people have a vet check out the animal B4 buying?


Yes, there is a basic TB test that is about 80% accurate, 20% false positive. If a cow has a reaction to the test, it is called suspect and a more accurate and costly test is done. Most people would not test for TB. It is virtually unknown in all states except Texas, California and a few localized counties in a couple other states.

No, cattle are seldom vet checked before purchase. Even with a vet check, it is doubtful a TB test would be done, unless purchased from an area known to have TB. Other diseases can be difficult to accurately test for.

The herd the bull came from was tested and there were no infected cattle there. Apparently, this closed herd did not become infected with TB by the neighbor's bull. Hundreds of deer and other wildlife were tested, from a 2 mile circle around the infected farm, all were negative for TB.
The point here is that diseases occur and sometimes you never know where it came from. Often the bacterial infections that taint milk show no outward signs, the cows look and act healthy.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> We vet check twice a year and strip test our milk monthly as well as clean milking and processing area. We also have a closed air milker. Our milk doesn't see air into its bottled right beside the fridge. Cleanliness and health make all the difference in the world.


Good for you. Sounds like you are doing what you can to limit risks. BTW, what does your Vet test for? TB? Campylobacter, Listeria? Johnes? Salmonella? E Coli? 
Your monthly strip test covers what, just white blood cells(pus)? 
Ever test the milk for campylobacter?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

barnbilder said:


> Probably wouldn't test if it wasn't required for crossing state lines. Can't sell any milk, have to rely on fair premiums to make a living. Hey lets go pen our animals next to animals from two states away. But it's safe, they always send the state vets to the fair, they are so good they can look at an animal and actually see potential pathogens incubating. Plus, you have to have a vet certificate every thirty days, in which time you could hit four or five fairs in as many states. TB in milk occurrences went way down when people with TB quit coughing in the bucket.
> 
> But yes, raw milk, if it scares you, you should probably also stay away from bagged salad, amusement park rides, motor vehicles and doctors.


Taking animals to the fair exposes them to every pathogen from every farm represented at the fair. Because of this concern, some fairs have become "terminal". Every animal brought to the fair for display never returns to a farm, they are butchered.
No, the state Vet isn't able to see incubating pathogens. But they are able to see animals with disease symptoms. They are also checking to insure those animals brought in from other states have been inspected and certified free of disease by a Vet from that state. Interstate Certificate of Veterinary Inspection. Different requirements for each state and different species. 

Systematic testing and culling of cattle brought TB down. In fact most states have TB-free status in cattle and have maintained that status for many years.
Just as the millions USDA spent testing and culling of pigs for psudorabies has eliminated that disease in domestic hogs. 
As the number of third world workers increases, exposure to third world diseases increases.
But currently, the spread of TB in cattle in this country is from cattle to cattle and deer to cattle, not Jesus coughing in a pail of milk.


----------



## john bigham (Feb 14, 2014)

barnbilder said:


> It's really easy to test for TB and also pretty easy to quarantine new animals that haven't been tested. (We have tested since 1994.) I think if someone was worried about catching the TB, it would be much more likely to catch TB from one of the thousands of undocumented immigrants that are pouring into our country. Some of which, of course end up employed to pick leafy green vegetables, as in regard to the original topic.


Preach it! 
My family has drank raw milk for YEARS with no problems. 

Look, everything in life is a risk. You could get out of bed in the morning, fall down the steps break your neck and die. You could also get sick from ANYTHING you eat. The list is endless. 
The point raw milk advocates are trying to make is this: I should be able to drink raw milk if I want to. It's not up to the government to make these decisions for me or my children. I don't think most parents would do anything they thought would harm their kids, anyway it's none of the government's business what you feed your kids!! 
What the government really needs to be doing is building a wall on our southern border, wiping out terrorists, doing something to stop the drug problem, etc. NOT worrying about you and me drinking raw milk!!!! I think we can all agree here.
If you don't want to drink raw milk fine. But don't attack me for doing it.

I am done now


----------



## Oldshep (Mar 28, 2015)

I drink it everyday and never had a healthier stomach. Raw milk all the way.


----------



## horseheaven (Jun 16, 2015)

Anything raw not cultivated, raised or slaughtered in sanitary conditions is bad. I am not talking about junk food because it is by far, the unhealthiest food... Industrialization is what has made food unsafe. People get sick or die from E Coli found in dirty farms due to overcrowding, due to antibiotics, hormones..., just to maximize profit, and to the detriment of our health. Spinach, cantaloupe, meat, processed food/milk, just to name a few, has killed people. Men started pasteurizing milk not to make it safer, but instead to make it last longer on the shelves and generate more money. You should see how the poor dairy cows are raised, treated and how long they last. That 'fake milk' doesn't taste like real milk. It is full of somatic cells and full of colorants and full of hormones and full of only God knows what! Even the containers it comes into is worse...but probably healthier to consume than what it contains!!! I ended up at the hospital due to that pasteurized milk. I was admitted for several days and they run all kinds of nasty tests on me, to only find out I was allergic to milk. Later, after taking a chance, I found out I was just fine with raw milk. I not got my own goats, drink their fresh real milk, make my own cheese and above all, I HAVE MY CAFE AU LAIT EVERY MORNING! I just fought an 8 month battle with our town Board of Health and we are now allowed to sell raw milk. All is not required is be licensed by the State. The truth of the matter is that we need to go back to small scale farming. Industrialization and farming don't get along. CAFOs are the worse and we need to do something about it. It takes a lot of expensive resources to keep farm factories 'clean' and they do a lot of harm to our environment... I could go on but I'd never be done on this issue. I recommend The Raw Milk Revolution by David Gumpert. It is a wonderful book that explain in details what is going on. The raw milk issue is only the tip of the iceberg and there is a new wave of people that is fighting hard to go back to our roots in order to live in tune with Mother Nature.


----------



## suz1023 (Feb 27, 2008)

Fwiw I have had increasingly worse stomach issues since chemo two years ago.
Constant nausea, insane bloating (felt like I would burst and/or give birth) and utter fatigue.
In June I tried raw milk and within four hours not only felt better but had a normal bowel movement for the first time in two years.
I now drink a glass a day and the bloat is mostly gone, bms are back to normal and I feel so much better.
The raw milk seems to be repopulating my gut which felt like it was failing, maybe even dying.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

suz1023 said:


> Fwiw I have had increasingly worse stomach issues since chemo two years ago.
> Constant nausea, insane bloating (felt like I would burst and/or give birth) and utter fatigue.
> In June I tried raw milk and within four hours not only felt better but had a normal bowel movement for the first time in two years.
> I now drink a glass a day and the bloat is mostly gone, bms are back to normal and I feel so much better.
> The raw milk seems to be repopulating my gut which felt like it was failing, maybe even dying.


That's great news. Do you only do raw cows milk? My family was plagued with stomach issues. Ibs, diverticulitis, Gerd, celiacs. It was awful. We switched to raw cows milk. It made a world of difference. However it had to be in moderation as both my son and I are lactose intolerant. We cant touch a drop of store bought cows milk. But raw we could handle for the most part. But still were having some stomach issues. So we bought dairy goats and milked ourselves. It changed lives! Much easier to digest, more vitamins and nutrients and easier to get and maintain goats over cattle. Goats milk is the closest thing to our own milk which is why many babies were raised on it in the old days. But all of our stomach problems are gone. I word definitely try it if you hadn't already.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

The monthly tests that most raw milk sellers use cover campylobacter, E. coli, among others. The test you are thinking of that covers somatic cell count is just the cheesy one the state vets office does along with dhi testing. Always fun to throw in a sample of storebought milk, just to keep things in perspective.


----------



## wendygoerl (Apr 30, 2005)

njenner said:


> Raw milk is safe until it is not and a child ends up on dialysis - adults can choose but sorry I have to disagree if kids are involved. IF you grew up on a dairy farm drinking raw milk, your entire life-you may be fine but city folks do not have the tolerance for contamination. Louise Pasteur saved Millions of people from dying due to contaminated raw milk. Not my opinion; science fact.....I'm not saying fast food is any safer; and why we don't eat it&#65533;&#65533;


Raw (Unpasteurized) Dairy Products
118 total outbreaks
85 fluid milk: 17 cow, 4 goat, 64 unspecified milk type
27 cheese: 2 aged, 3 homemade, 17 Mexican-style queso fresco, 1 goat chevre, 1 curds, 3 unspecified
6 multiple raw dairy products (fluid milk, cheese, and/or colostrum)
2,128 total illnesses, 2 deaths
1,495 fluid milk-related illnesses, no deaths: 225 cow, 63 goat, 1,202 unspecified
576 cheese-related illnesses: 46 aged, 80 homemade, 324 Mexican-style queso fresco (2 deaths), 5 goat chevre, 63 curds, 58 unspecified cheese type 
57 multiple raw dairy products-related illnesses (fluid milk, cheese, and/or colostrum)
Pasteurized Dairy Products
26 total outbreaks
9 fluid milk
16 cheese: 14 non-Mexican style; 2 Mexican style queso fresco
1 powdered milk
2,786 total illnesses, 4 deaths
2,200 fluid and powdered milk-related illnesses (3 deaths)
550 cheese-related illnesses: 537 non-Mexican style (1 death), 13 Mexican style queso fresco
36 powdered milk-related illnesses 



If you're adding that up, that's 2 raw milk deaths vs. 8 pasteurized milk deaths: YOU'RE FOUR TIMES MORE LIKELY TO DIE IF THE MILK IS PASTEURIZED.


Also note: The raw milk data includes "homemade" milk that may not have been subjected to industry controls, while ALL "pasteurized" 

milk was subject to milk-industry safety controls.


----------



## ramiller5675 (Mar 31, 2009)

wendygoerl said:


> ...If you're adding that up, that's 2 raw milk deaths vs. 8 pasteurized milk deaths: YOU'RE FOUR TIMES MORE LIKELY TO DIE IF THE MILK IS PASTEURIZED....


You're NOT four times more likely to die from pasteurized milk unless half of the milk being consumed is raw milk. 

How many people do you think drink raw milk compared to those that drink pasteurized milk? One percent? Ten percent? 

I doubt if ten percent of the milk being consumed is raw milk, but using your numbers, at that level you would be more likely to die from drinking raw milk.

If only one percent of milk consumed is raw milk, you would be much, much more likely to die from raw milk.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

barnbilder said:


> The monthly tests that most raw milk sellers use cover campylobacter, E. coli, among others. The test you are thinking of that covers somatic cell count is just the cheesy one the state vets office does along with dhi testing. Always fun to throw in a sample of storebought milk, just to keep things in perspective.


It has been my experience that raw milk sellers test for nothing. But much of my experience is with the end run around inspection and regulation called herd share.

How is it that you know what the majority of raw milk sellers test for? 

What, exactly, are the "among others" that are part of this common regimen you speak of?

Just as I do not care about you driving drunk on your property, but have strong feelings against you driving drunk on public roads, I don't care what you do with the milk you consume on your farm, just don't want your unsanitary milk available to the public because the fairly common reported illnesses reflect badly and hurts family farms that supply milk for pasteurization. .
I don't care if you feed it to your children, either. If they get sick from what you gave them, I leave that up to the Health Department and Child Protective Services.

BTW, there is no artificial color or hormones added to pasteurized milk.

If you have a negative reaction to store milk and not with raw, it is more likely due to homogenization than pasteurization. Milk fat will "glob together" unless homogenized. That makes it easier for the milk grease to coat your stomach.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Actually the CDC admits pasteurization does inactivate some enzymes but goes on to state "the enzymes in raw animal milk are not thought to be important in human health" and that pasteurization "does not significantly change the nutritional value of milk and dairy products".
http://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-questions-and-answers.html#benefits

That being said, I don't drink milk. I get sick every time I do. I can't say I've ever had raw milk and don't know if I want to drink it. But if someone else wants to drink raw milk that should be their choice. The milk should be tested for contamination if it's being sold commercially.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

"The study counted 979 confirmed illnesses and 73 hospitalizations linked to raw milk over the six-year period. (It may be important to note that, with most pathogens, experts estimate there are a* few dozen uncounted* illnesses for every *one* illness confirmed by a health laboratory.)"

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/12/study-number-of-raw-milk-outbreaks-on-the-rise/#.VcvFTf3bJ2E


----------



## G. Seddon (May 16, 2005)

I don't drink raw milk and I don't often drink grocery store milk. One of the vets I used to work for once told me that if I visited a dairy, I'd never drink milk again. 

So my suggestion to all those arguing about the benefits of raw milk is ask your vet's opinion.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

wendygoerl said:


> Raw (Unpasteurized) Dairy Products
> 118 total outbreaks
> 85 fluid milk: 17 cow, 4 goat, 64 unspecified milk type
> 27 cheese: 2 aged, 3 homemade, 17 Mexican-style queso fresco, 1 goat chevre, 1 curds, 3 unspecified
> ...


I love this post. This is such a classic example of reading statistics and interpreting them however you'd like to make your point. Aside from the obvious point already stated that the number of people who drink raw milk is far lower than pasteurized, the numbers above show 4 deaths to 8, not 2 to 8. If you're going to quote sources to support your argument, you might want to read them.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

haypoint said:


> It has been my experience that raw milk sellers test for nothing. But much of my experience is with the end run around inspection and regulation called herd share.
> 
> How is it that you know what the majority of raw milk sellers test for?
> 
> ...


No its due to the lactase being cooked off during pasteurization. Lactase is what helps us digest the milk. Most vitamins like d do not survive either. That's why it says d fortified. They add synthetic d which our body really won't absorb.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Vitamin D is not affected by heat. It was added to milk in the late 30's (in the US) to combat a rickets epidemic. It is not a required addition in the US unless the label says "fortified". It is a required addition in Canada.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/6/1710S.full


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

When it comes to pros vs cons, I'm satisfied with the pros. 
http://www.mercola.com/article/milk/no-milk.htm


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

IMHO Dr. Mercola has done more harm to the public than Monsanto.
So, when you throw that guy into your authority pile, I'm done. He's made a living twisting the truth and fabricating information. I've not got the time, nor the interest in studying all of his work and then researching and collecting data to prove him wrong. Sort of like "Bop the Prairie Dog" As soon as I disprove one thing, there'll be ten other outlandish claims. 
Vitamins survive pasteurization intact.
The human body absorbs Vitamin D.
Lactose is not cooked out of milk during pasteurization or any other time. 
Lactose is a sugar that is made up of two different sugar molecules. The disaccharide (di for two and saccharide for sugar) is made up of the two sugar molecules galactose and glucose. The bond that holds these two sugars together is broken by an enzyme called lactase. The reason that many folks are lactose intolerant is because their bodies don't make the enzyme lactase. 
Are you getting these thoughts from Mercola?
He is in on the vaccines cause Autism foolishness, too.
Published a book on the Bird Flu Hoax, opps!
The medical watchdog site Quackwatch has criticized Mercola for making "unsubstantiated claims [that] clash with those of leading medical and public health organizations and many unsubstantiated recommendations for dietary supplements

http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~policylab/2013/06/14/pulling-back-the-curtain-on-dr-oz/

http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/mercola.html

Are you off gluten now, too? In the Mercola web site you posted, he says Vit D is toxic to your liver and isn't absorbed, but later on he says you should buy his Vit D supplement to stay healthy? 
He goes on and on about BGH. There is no way humans can absorb or utilize a cow hormone, but beyond all that, BGH is rarely if ever used. It was tried and didn't work as well as some had hoped. It was to increase milk production but it had mixed results. So farmers stopped using it. But Mercola still is beating the drum of fear of the unknown.


----------



## terri9630 (Mar 12, 2012)

cooper101 said:


> That's quite a bit of a stretch.
> 
> You took a picture of a bad farm and extrapolated that to every dairy farm to fit your narrative. If this is the only large dairy you've ever seen, then you need to get out more.
> 
> ...


There are at least 9 dairies near me and they all look like that picture. The manure is piled with the cows standing/laying on the piles. The few that have open fields are used for hay. Not cows.


----------



## wannabfarmer (Jun 30, 2015)

Ok so I got through page 4 when I realized eryone is pretty much saying the same thing. I'm looking at having milk goats for my family. I've checked up on a clean milking process so I'm not worried about cleanliness because I will be the one doing it and we will be the ones drinking it (maybe a neighbor if they want some). The info I was looking for but maybe I missed it with all of the medical lingo, can my family safely drink raw goat milk that I know the animal is healthy (tested) and my milking process is clean? I do agree with other posts that just because a person has a small farm and is likeable doesn't mean they are the cleanest person/health concious. But I don't see how they are anymore dangerous than the milk farm that produces on a mass scale but skips some steps in the process. They are both equally dangerous on quality but one is a lot more dangerous with quantity.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

If you just moved out to the country, it will probably kill you to drink raw milk. If you have been exposed to your farm's soil from a very early age, nursed while your mom shoveled the barn out, played in the dirt and made mud pies, etc., then it is highly unlikely that you could catch anything from your own raw milk, that you don't already have. I would suggest pasteurizing anything you give to anyone with a compromised immune system, starting with small quantities if you want to try raw, and anything that looks questionable, or got a hoof in the bucket, you throw to the pigs. Likewise with cheese products, if it doesn't look like it's supposed to, turn it into bacon.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

It is very important to note, that in the above figures, both raw milk deaths came from Mexican style cheese, often made in the bathtub of a small house with a large family, who may, or may not pay their water bill.


----------



## Sumatra (Dec 5, 2013)

haypoint said:


> All I can base my statements are the facts of my real life experiences. The grocery stores around here receive eggs daily. The eggs are shipped out of Herbrick's facility every hour throughout the day.
> Eggs are conveyor collected as the hens lay them. They are inspected and packaged. There is no "egg warehouse". Just delivery trucks.
> In my experience, eggs purchased in local grocery stores are often less than 24 hours away from falling out of the hen and rarely over 48 hours old.
> Please don't take my word for it. Ask the manager at the grocery store.
> The brighter yoke color and less runniness of back yard flocks isn't a measure of freshness as it is diet and production levels.


That's awesome for your locale and groceries. But I doubt many can say the same of most places, especially in department stores which can contain a half-dozen or more brands with varying ages to each. 

It's true that the egg color is based on the beta carotene levels in the hen's diet, but that doesn't apply to yolk runniness. Only freshness or velvetleaf which is one of the only plants that can cause rubbery yolks, can affect firmness.

You'll also notice that people who often make hard boiled eggs either use store-bought eggs, or age their own chicken's eggs for a week or so in their refrigerator. Why? Because the easy peeling required depends on the eggs age. This is probably the best proof that store-bought eggs are older.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

Are they less dead?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

cooper101 said:


> Are they less dead?


 There are no deader than the people that got killed by USDA inspected powdered milk.
Sometimes it is just your time to go. I find it interesting that a lot of the largest anti-raw milk activists who seem to be worried about making sure people don't get killed, also subscribe to political ideals that support wholesale slaughter of innocent people. I guess it's OK as long as it's the government or big government subsidized corporations killing people.


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

So pointing out how data posted to attempt to support the safety of raw milk actually points out how it's not safer makes me a supporter of wholesale slaughter of humans???

It must be exhausting to rant and rail against everything all the time.


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

I like to stick with statistics and facts. The attached table is based on facts. I agree with Haypoint - if it is legal to sell raw milk in your state, have at it. My DH knows of several former raw milk advocates that almost killed their kids and learned their lesson. They now oppose sale of raw milk. Unfortunately, they learned the hard way. People do not become immune to the pathogens that naturally occur in ALL cows feces. And clean milking only goes so far.


----------



## oklaoutlaw (Aug 31, 2012)

Let's all follow and do exactly what the government and big corporations tell us to do.

Fluoride protects your teeth and eats holes in your brain.
LET'S DISOBEY GOD AND MARRY THE SAME SEX.
I've worked at a large dairy plant never did figure out why those guys wouldn't drink their own product. Oh, let's see maybe they knew what they were doing to it or adding to it.
Scripture says all things are here for us to use and consume.
Eat more hormonal chicken and GMO products and wonder why our 8 year olds are wearing C cups

Uncle ate bacon and eggs every morning for 96 years hope I live that long.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Is amazing any of us are alive. Considering raw milk was the daily staple for thousands of years. Lol


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Here is a good read on the cdc reports. And the true leaders in harmful foods. 
http://chriskresser.com/raw-milk-reality-is-raw-milk-dangerous/


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

I knew the government shill comments were coming but didn't know raw milk and homophobia were related.


----------



## Gravytrain (Mar 2, 2013)

njenner said:


> I like to stick with statistics and facts. The attached table is based on facts. I agree with Haypoint - if it is legal to sell raw milk in your state, have at it. My DH knows of several former raw milk advocates that almost killed their kids and learned their lesson. They now oppose sale of raw milk. Unfortunately, they learned the hard way. People do not become immune to the pathogens that naturally occur in ALL cows feces. And clean milking only goes so far.


Njenner, you forgot to post the other half of the data. I'm sure the omission was an oversight...since you like to stick with statistics and fact and all...

View attachment pasteurized-dairy-outbreak-table.pdf


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

Sorry -I don't/will not subscribe to conspiracy followers. I'm not going to change any minds here so it appears there is no point to any further dialogue. My DH happens to be one of the leading experts in the country on milk pathogens. I will trust his science based opinion. Oh and by the way, he grew up on a dairy farm.


----------



## Ronney (Nov 26, 2004)

This is a subject that is always going to polarise people and who is to say who is right and who is wrong.

I milk my own cows, I drink the milk from them and that is my right as an educated and informed person. If others don't wish to do so, that is their right. I'm not going to tell them they should but by the same token I don't want them telling me I'm an uneducated, ill-informed idiot. To each their own.

As a matter of interest, TB testing in New Zealand is mandatory irrespective of whether a person owns one cow or 1,000.

Cheers,
Ronnie


----------



## Gravytrain (Mar 2, 2013)

njenner said:


> Sorry -I don't/will not subscribe to conspiracy followers. I'm not going to change any minds here so it appears there is no point to any further dialogue.


Sorry... presenting only the data that bolsters your argument is not "sticking to the statistics and facts"...THAT is called presenting your side of the story, and that is fine...not scientific, but fine. Turning around and calling anyone that provides additional data or personal experience "conspiracy theorists" is ummm...let's call it disingenuous. 




> My DH happens to be one of the leading experts in the country on milk pathogens. I will trust his science based opinion. Oh and by the way, he grew up on a dairy farm.


So...when your hubby is doing research, does he cherry pick the data that satisfies his agenda, or does he look at all the data? If he is a scientist, he should have no agenda. Oh, btw...I grew up on a dairy farm, am a biologist and I recognize that contamination can and does happen post-pasteurization, just as I recognize that contamination can very easily happen without pasteurization.

I'm not here to advocate either way. I like people to exercise their own choices. However, if you are going to lecture about "facts and statistics" then provide all the data.

FWIW, I grew up drinking raw milk from a bulk tank that was stored in a barely cool fridge. I don't recommend this...I also hated milk...hunks of cream floating around in semi-warm liquid grossed me out to be honest. Most of my adult life I drank commercial 2% or skim milk from the store. 

About 10 years ago I started having digestive issues and would get horrible reflux (as well as other symptoms) from drinking milk. A local acquaintance owns a Jersey dairy from which he distributes both homogenized/pasteurized milk as well as raw milk. I've seen his milking parlor/bottling center and it is very clean. I started getting raw milk from there as well as whole pasteurized for the rest of the family. No more reflux or other digestive issues and it is by far the best tasting milk I've ever had. 

I have no desire to force other families to drink raw milk, but I am glad I have the ability to drink it.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

http://davidgumpert.com/watch-out-fda-campaign-against-raw-milk-cheese-moving-into-super-opaque-mode

Here is some more "conspiracy theory". It seems that "conspiracy theory" is the new catch phrase for defenders of bloated and senseless government. If you don't agree with their progressive agenda, then you are a conspiracy theorist. Maybe also a racist, in some instances. It is a mode of coping, similar to putting ones hands over ones ears and going "blah blah blah" while someone is saying something that another doesn't want to hear.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

I don't think anyone wants to force raw milk on anyone. The outrage here comes from a sense of fairness. The FDA isn't going after Tattoos, which pose a high risk of illness from diseases which can spread to others after the initial outbreak. You don't have to buy your own tattoo needle and make your own ink if you want a tattoo, even though you could get possibly fatal diseases. There have even been cases of what amounts to tuberculosis from tattoos. Where are the pamphlets? Why attack something that is relatively safe, compared to many things?


----------



## cooper101 (Sep 13, 2010)

Your original post stated that raw milk was safe and your subsequent posts then stated there are circumstances when it wasn't. If your first post said "raw milk is safe when it is handled correctly," I think that people would have thought "yep." You posted it to pick a fight and you got it. When our statistically challenged friend posted data that most certainly pointed to raw milk being more dangerous than pasteurized, everybody who doesn't agree with you became supporters of mass murder. Problems will always exist and people will always solve them. Hyperbole and demonizing anyone who doesn't agree with you 100% will never solve a problem.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

http://milk.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000806

Differing viewpoints.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Demonizing people that don't agree with you. Is that anything like calling one doctor a nut for suggesting that raw milk has health benefits, because the majority of doctors, (who regularly off people by prescribing horrible things like Lipitor) don't agree with him?


----------



## DJ in WA (Jan 28, 2005)

cooper101 said:


> Your original post stated that raw milk was safe and your subsequent posts then stated there are circumstances when it wasn't. If your first post said "raw milk is safe when it is handled correctly," I think that people would have thought "yep." You posted it to pick a fight and you got it. When our statistically challenged friend posted data that most certainly pointed to raw milk being more dangerous than pasteurized, everybody who doesn't agree with you became supporters of mass murder. Problems will always exist and people will always solve them. Hyperbole and demonizing anyone who doesn't agree with you 100% will never solve a problem.


I looked in the original post and saw the word "safer". Which doesn't usually mean something is 100% safe.

But apparently government and those fighting all raw milk, have decided that it if it isn't all 100% safe, it needs to be banned.

Everything, however, is less safe than something else. Not sure how we magically determine that something is dangerous to the point of banning and fighting against. For example, driving is less safe than flying. Seems haypoint should be starting threads showing all the car wrecks and carnage, and would try to dissuade people from driving, but promote flying only.

Of course, some driving is safer than others, but that is too complicated, just ban it all, right?

Likewise, pasteurized milk is more dangerous than soft drinks, so maybe we ought to ban all milk.

Our public health officials and politicians and corporate giants make decisions that we should drink pasteurized milk from dirty dairies, or that kids should get fat on soft drinks rather than raw milk from clean cows.


----------



## njenner (Jul 15, 2013)

haypoint said:


> http://milk.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000806
> 
> Differing viewpoints.


Good article. I am familiar with Organic Pastures as it is located very close to me. It has been cited repeatedly for unsanitary milking conditions and ships raw milk labeled as "pet food" in order to circumvent interstate shipping ban. Of course not ALL raw milk dairies are unscrupulous but the supporters of Organic Pastures are just as convinced its milk is the cure-all.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

http://dairygood.org/big-farms-myths

more information about your milk.


----------



## SCRancher (Jan 11, 2011)

I only made it to page 2.

Here is an interesting experiment:
Take a gallon of fresh raw milk and a gallon of pasteurized milk and stick them in the fridge - for 6 or more months.

Good luck with the store bought milk as it probably will have exploded.

I had a gallon of raw milk for my calves that I was bottle feeding that I forgot about shoved into the back of my secondary fridge, it was in the fridge for well over 6 months.

I opened it up and pored it into my garden. It didn't smell like spoiled milk at all although it was a bit chunky.

My point is that raw milk has both good and bad bacteria in it that seemed to make it much more stable than store bought pasteurized milk.


----------



## SCRancher (Jan 11, 2011)

I'm not getting into the whole good vs bad think I will only relate my story and you can take it for what you want.

Pasteurized milk from the store gives me gas - fact. I have tried this numerous times over about 3 or 4 years now.

Raw milk doesn't give me gas. Not even when I drink large quantities of it all at once. I tried it, I drank 1/2 a gallon in a couple of hours on purpose to see if it would give me gas, it didn't.

I don't really know what to make of it but I have 3 choices. Drink store milk and have gas. Don't drink any milk, or drink raw milk. Usually I now don't drink milk even though I love milk.

But right now I have a gallon of raw milk on hand so I'm enjoying my milk.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

My neighbors started a cheese factory and using their own milk (pasteurized) made excellent cheese. No doubt the pasteurization changed the milk, but as one of them commented to me the real difference between farm tank raw and store bought was homogenization. Smashing the milk so hard it won't separate blending, filtering, pumping to and from tank to tank. Milk is delicate and is damaged easily. Pasteurization kills pathogens, and while i have has both raw and milk for both home and the neighbors the real difference to me seems to be the homogenization and excessive handling.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

SCRancher said:


> I only made it to page 2.
> 
> Here is an interesting experiment:
> Take a gallon of fresh raw milk and a gallon of pasteurized milk and stick them in the fridge - for 6 or more months.
> ...


Interesting. Seems to me most folks that are drinking raw milk will tell you the importance of keeping it clean, filtering it right away and then quickly cooling it. But your 6 month old raw milk poured out in chunks but was not spoiled. Interesting.


----------



## Ronney (Nov 26, 2004)

I can vouch for SCRanchers observation because I see the same thing. I keep excess milk in 44 gal. drums for the pigs and so it's not even in a fridge although it is on the south side of the building which is always cool. After 4 months it is still quite usable. It will have separated but I have a plunger to remix it and it comes out chunky and doesn't smell bad at all. There is always a group of hens and dogs waiting to pounce on anything that gets spilt.

I have often thought that milk is far more robust than people make out.

Cheers,
Ronnie


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Found a little read today. 

http://althealthworks.com/7664/the-real-reason-why-raw-milk-is-illegalyelena/


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Found a little read today.
> 
> http://althealthworks.com/7664/the-real-reason-why-raw-milk-is-illegalyelena/


Wow, I don't know which article to read first, baking soda cure for cancer, Chinese plastic rice, advice to wait 15 minutes after being bitten by a Black Widow spider or eliminating cancer with grapes. They all sound so believable:buds:.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Ya but I bet a few maybe even more then a few people take it as the truth, sorry to say.


----------



## Sumatra (Dec 5, 2013)

haypoint said:


> Wow, I don't know which article to read first, baking soda cure for cancer, Chinese plastic rice, advice to wait 15 minutes after being bitten by a Black Widow spider or eliminating cancer with grapes. They all sound so believable:buds:.


Some are far-fetched, others quite credible. Nobody expects you to agree 100% with the articles on every site. Discern as you wish.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Sumatra said:


> Some are far-fetched, others quite credible. Nobody expects you to agree 100% with the articles on every site. Discern as you wish.


Some people read things and place credibility based on a broad spectrum of their own knowledge of the subject. On topics that they are not experts, they rely on the credibility of the source. When someone writes an article that I am well versed and I see that it is BS, I tend to not believe her when she writes about other subjects that I'm not so well versed.

Plus, I want to know how this author became such an expert in all these things she writes about. 

So, this young lady has written several articles and this is a report on her background:

http://www.floweroflifecenter.org/?q...na-sukhoterina

"Yelena serves as a writer and public relations associate for Flower of Life Center. Her journalism background, coupled with a passion for creating global change, allows her to write editorials and blog posts on a variety of cutting edge topics related to health, spirituality and higher consciousness. She also develops press releases, web content and promotional pieces for the organization. 
She has joined the team by following her heart, which led her to a spiritual awakening soon after graduating college. She has been fascinated by astrology, crystal healing, metaphysics, numerology, Tarot readings and new age philosophies since her pre-teens, and at 24 years old, a sequence of events and a new beliefs all came together to open a new path for her. Yelena hopes to inspire others to find their way to happiness, loving conscious relationships, and feeling more connected to the universe.
Yelena sees life as a grand and beautiful journey where every meeting, every lesson, every human experience is a gift for which she is grateful. She believes the human kind to be moving slowly but surely in a direction towards a world where everyone works together to build a better future for all of us.
In her free time, Yelena makes necklaces out of paper beads and crystals for her Etsy store Creative Road Jewelry, cooks all-organic meals, and thinks of ways to make life more fulfilling for her and those around her. Yelena has a B.S. in Journalism from Wayne State University."

Now I might buy paper necklace beads from her Esty account, but I don't see her as a cancer expert or any factual basis to her rant about raw milk.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Still more credible than the USDA.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Do you think you need a degree from a liberal govt Institute to learn or educate yourself on facts that are open to the public? Instien was a drop out some called a quack. The knowledge is there for those willing to educate themselves. But if you want to take the usda/big money interest funded govt, go ahead. They tell the truth all the time!


----------



## ramiller5675 (Mar 31, 2009)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Do you think you need a degree from a liberal govt Institute to learn or educate yourself on facts that are open to the public? Instien was a drop out some called a quack. The knowledge is there for those willing to educate themselves. But if you want to take the usda/big money interest funded govt, go ahead. They tell the truth all the time!


Who the heck is Instien?


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

haypoint said:


> Some people read things and place credibility based on a broad spectrum of their own knowledge of the subject. On topics that they are not experts, they rely on the credibility of the source. When someone writes an article that I am well versed and I see that it is BS, I tend to not believe her when she writes about other subjects that I'm not so well versed.
> 
> Plus, I want to know how this author became such an expert in all these things she writes about.
> 
> ...


That's just so cool. I feel like I'm floating to a higher consciousness just reading it. Oh, no, wait. I'm just high.

She has BS in Journalism. Now that I agree with.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Remember we don't spank for spelling here and please keep replies friendly or at least respectful. Instein I assume refers to Einstein.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

ramiller5675 said:


> Who the heck is Instien?


Simple typing error on small phone screen. Though it's funny that's all you got from that.


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

Ross said:


> Remember we don't spank for spelling here and please keep replies friendly or at least respectful. Instein I assume refers to Einstein.


Dog forbid. Advocate practices that have been shown to endanger the health of children, now that's OK.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Agriculture said:


> Dog forbid. Advocate practices that have been shown to endanger the health of children, now that's OK.


Coming from a generational family of raw milk drinkers in a farming community full of raw milk drinkers, your statement has no factual basis. There are far more outbreaks from veggies and meat than milk. Your facts are based on the statements of those in the milk industry or at the very least in their pockets. Including the usda. When they passed the laws banning raw milk it shut down tens of thousands of farms selling it for decades without incident. All because they weren't getting a cut. Many restaurants bought their milk from local dairies. And did not switch when they started pasteurization. So the big milk guys couldn't get their fingers in the market. So they lobbied to have changed made. Every single one of your ancestors was raised on raw milk. Yet here you are.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Coming from a generational family of raw milk drinkers in a farming community full of raw milk drinkers, your statement has no factual basis. There are far more outbreaks from veggies and meat than milk. Your facts are based on the statements of those in the milk industry or at the very least in their pockets. Including the usda. When they passed the laws banning raw milk it shut down tens of thousands of farms selling it for decades without incident. All because they weren't getting a cut. Many restaurants bought their milk from local dairies. And did not switch when they started pasteurization. So the big milk guys couldn't get their fingers in the market. So they lobbied to have changed made. Every single one of your ancestors was raised on raw milk. Yet here you are.


I think your recollection of history is off. The ban on raw milk didn't change things on most dairy farms. Farms continued to sell their milk to the processors.The bottling operations had to upgrade. Perhaps in your area the increased standards for milk at the farm gave farmers the choice to meet the new cleanliness standards or get out, but really not tied to pasteurization. Farmers weren't generally doing the bottling. There were some places doing both milking and bottling and even delivery. 
Heck, lots of Amish still sell their milk to processors, so must be the current laws aren't hurting small farms.
With the shortage of manpower during the war, some small farms stopped milking. 
Lots of places stop milking for all sorts of reasons. 40 years ago, my neighbor was a big dairy farmer, one of the biggest in the area. Stopped milking 25 years ago. 200 cows isn't enough to make a living. Has nothing to do with pasteurization.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Agriculture said:


> Dog forbid. Advocate practices that have been shown to endanger the health of children, now that's OK.



I'm not here to save the world just promote discussion. If we stop talking about dangerous things we'll have to stop farming talk altogether!


----------



## doc- (Jun 26, 2015)

Agriculture said:


> She has BS in Journalism. .


Isn't that redundant?


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

doc- said:


> Isn't that redundant?


Good point.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

barnbilder said:


> I would not consider the mayo clinic to be much of a source.


That's funny.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's funny.


 Ya I see some like to think that Mayo isn;t a authority on health but they sure are, people form all over the world come here to get treated at their clinic. Mayo has all sorts of good health news to gather your information from. And they even saved my life a few years ago.


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's funny.


That is one thing that I like about the raw milk crowd. Let them talk long enough and pretty soon they'll come out with something else outrageous that shows their true mentality. I bet that as soon as one of their children comes down with one of those serious diseases that the Mayo clinic treats but isn't much of an authority on, their tune will change pretty quickly. Some days I wonder why people die at all, when we have raw milk, DE, apple cider vinegar "with the mother" and turmeric to cure everything.


----------

