# Raw Milk strikes again! Don't read if you don't want to know.



## haypoint

New information about the dangers of raw milk. This is in a state that allows the sale of raw milk:
Date: Mon 30 Apr 2012
Source: Oregon Live [edited]
<http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2012/04/oregon_health_officials_add_tw.html>


Oregon health officials suspect 2 more illnesses are part of a raw milk outbreak traced nearly 3 weeks ago to a farm near Wilsonville.
William Keene, senior epidemiologist with Oregon Public Health, said the 2 adults had both consumed raw milk from Foundation Farm, including one who continued to drink it after being warned about the outbreak.

Keene said one was sickened by _Campylobacter_, the other by _Cryptosporidium_, making 21 likely cases in the outbreak. Ten others were infected with _E. coli_ O157. One of the worst foodborne pathogens, _E. coli_ O157:H7 was on rectal swabs from 2 of the farm's
4 cows. Milk and manure from the farm also tested positive for the same bacteria.

State epidemiologists did not test the cows or the environment for these other organisms, so they don't know for sure that the new cases are linked to Foundation Farm milk, but Keene said it's likely. "There is a long list of pathogens that people can get from raw milk," he said.

Four children who drank the milk were hospitalized with acute kidney failure, which is associated with _E. coli_ O157:H7. As of Fri 27 Apr 2012, they were still in the hospital, Keene said.

Two of the patients, aged 14 and 13, are Portland area middle schoolers. The others are 3 and one years old. A 5th child from Lane County, who drank the milk while visiting relatives in the Portland area, was hospitalized and released.

Foundation Farm, located on 5 acres in the Stafford area, had a herd-share operation for a least a year selling parts of cows to 48 families. In return, they had regular access to the raw milk.

Health officials also interviewed most of the families. They were surprised that a person continued to drink the milk even after being advised that it was contaminated. Keene said the 2nd patient went looking for a new source.

Just under 3 percent of Oregonians drink raw milk, according to a survey by Oregon Public Health. They tend to be passionate about it, despite public warnings.

"We've documented yet another unfortunate incident where people missed the boat on one of the great advances in public health, pasteurization," Keene said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can get more information at :
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/ho...aw-milk-much-more-likely-cause-illness-8.html


----------



## dollmaker

I don't see listeria on the list. Listeriosis almost killed me last year. Had to have brain surgery and still haven't regained all muscle control after almost a year. Can't move my right foot at all and can barely lift my right leg. Had to install a left foot accelerator in my car.

I will never consume another raw product for the rest of my life, that's for sure. No salads, nothing. Definitely no lunchmeats or dairy.

We think I got it from a salad bar.


----------



## Trixie

I think it would depend on the raw milk - as in if it was from your cow or purchased. I'm not sure I would drink raw milk that was purchased - although I have certainly done it in the past.


----------



## haypoint

dollmaker said:


> I don't see listeria on the list. Listeriosis almost killed me last year. Had to have brain surgery and still haven't regained all muscle control after almost a year. Can't move my right foot at all and can barely lift my right leg. Had to install a left foot accelerator in my car.
> 
> I will never consume another raw product for the rest of my life, that's for sure. No salads, nothing. Definitely no lunchmeats or dairy.
> 
> We think I got it from a salad bar.


The information in that thread and this one are just from the past 10-12 weeks. The last Listeria sicknesses from Raw Milk was over 6 months ago. I never heard any more about the guy in PA that became paralyzed from the Listeria in the raw milk he bought. I suspect he's recovered.
Just as you experienced, it is sometimes difficult locating the source of your sickness. If just one batch of salad was contaminated, by the time the Health Department gets back to that restaurant, it is gone. Same for a batch of raw milk. Only when the contamination is persistent, can its source be proven. Many cases of sickness from raw milk go unreported for a number of reasons.
I find it interesting that when a state, like OR and WA, legalizes the sale of raw milk, the number of reported cases of sickness from raw milk goes way up. Some would say it is due to the increased sales of raw milk. Iâd say it is because people are not as afraid to report sickness from a legal purchase as they are for an illegal purchase.


----------



## willow_girl

> including one who continued to drink it after being warned about the outbreak.


:doh:


----------



## haypoint

willow_girl said:


> :doh:


That person represents the " Well, my uncle drank raw milk for 60 years and it didn't hurt him, therefore all raw milk is safe and Lab results to the contrary are part of a government plot funded by Big Ag." group.eep:


----------



## Ambereyes

haypoint said:


> That person represents the " Well, my uncle drank raw milk for 60 years and it didn't hurt him, therefore all raw milk is safe and Lab results to the contrary are part of a government plot funded by Big Ag." group.eep:


To me that person represents the portion of the population that is just plain stupid, guess what I hear you can't cure stupid.. 

As to raw milk I drink it from my own stock, just like any other food product you must take precautions with cleanliness and the health of the animals. I can't drink pasteurized milk as it causes major intestinal issues :tmi:. I also make cheese and butter from my homegrown milk..


----------



## haypoint

I thought Dollmaker might find this interesting: 

MDARD continues to work with a Southeast Michigan dairy plant with confirmed Listeria monocytogenes contamination that has recurred in two cheese products. Production of the two products has been ceased and the plant is reassessing its sanitation program.


----------



## tnyardfarmer

"State epidemiologists did not test the cows or the environment for these other organisms, so they don't know for sure that the new cases are linked to Foundation Farm milk, but Keene said it's likely."

I am not interested in debating the good/bad of raw milk but putting this out without testing is poor science.


----------



## haypoint

tnyardfarmer said:


> "State epidemiologists did not test the cows or the environment for these other organisms, so they don't know for sure that the new cases are linked to Foundation Farm milk, but Keene said it's likely."
> 
> I am not interested in debating the good/bad of raw milk but putting this out without testing is poor science.


"Milk and manure from the farm also tested positive for the same bacteria." 
One must then question, where did the milk and manure originate?

If the milk had bacteria and the cow's manure had the same bacteria, do we need to test the cow to satisfy you?
If a chicken lays an egg with bacteria, and shoots out some chicken poo that tests positive for that same bacteria, it isn't really critical to test the chicken to see if the egg she just laid is contaminated.


----------



## tnyardfarmer

haypoint said:


> "Milk and manure from the farm also tested positive for the same bacteria."
> One must then question, where did the milk and manure originate?
> 
> If the milk had bacteria and the cow's manure had the same bacteria, do we need to test the cow to satisfy you?
> If a chicken lays an egg with bacteria, and shoots out some chicken poo that tests positive for that same bacteria, it isn't really critical to test the chicken to see if the egg she just laid is contaminated.


The same bacteria that was referred to was E_Coli.


----------



## haypoint

So we know that 18 people got very sick, some hospitalized and you want to debate the bacterial variety in their raw milk?

Here is the farm:


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Being raise in farm country just how many critters did they have on 5 acres ?? Here when the old timers were milking a few head their pasture was quite large the milk house you could eat off the floor too:hammer:


----------



## haypoint

More Illnesses Linked to Raw Milk From Oregon Farm

Here is part of that news report:

"*Raw milk is essentially a suspension of fecal organisms in a nutrient broth*," explains Keene. "Milk is a great growth medium for bacteria and raw milk is always contaminated with fecal-oral organisms. It's a question of whether that particular tank has got something from an animal that happened to be shedding cryptosporidium or E. coli or whatever."
Campylobacter is a bacterium transmitted through animal feces that causes diarrhea (often bloody), abdominal pain, fever, nausea and vomiting. Symptoms typically appear 2-5 days after exposure, but can begin up to 10 days after ingestion.
Cryptosporidium is a parasite - often spread through water contamination. Cryptosporidium infections are characterized by abdominal cramps or pain, dehydration, nausea, vomiting, fever and weight loss.


----------



## tnyardfarmer

No, I am not debating the type of bacteria. I am saying that before they attribute the illness to the milk it should be verified.


----------



## JeffreyD

haypoint said:


> So we know that 18 people got very sick, some hospitalized and you want to debate the bacterial variety in their raw milk?
> 
> Here is the farm:


Where's the rest of the pictures of their farm?


----------



## JeffreyD

haypoint said:


> New information about the dangers of raw milk. This is in a state that allows the sale of raw milk:
> Date: Mon 30 Apr 2012
> Source: Oregon Live [edited]
> <http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2012/04/oregon_health_officials_add_tw.html>
> 
> 
> Oregon health officials suspect 2 more illnesses are part of a raw milk outbreak traced nearly 3 weeks ago to a farm near Wilsonville.
> William Keene, senior epidemiologist with Oregon Public Health, said the 2 adults had both consumed raw milk from Foundation Farm, including one who continued to drink it after being warned about the outbreak.
> 
> Keene said one was sickened by _Campylobacter_, the other by _Cryptosporidium_, making 21 likely cases in the outbreak. Ten others were infected with _E. coli_ O157. One of the worst foodborne pathogens, _E. coli_ O157:H7 was on rectal swabs from 2 of the farm's
> 4 cows. Milk and manure from the farm also tested positive for the same bacteria.
> 
> State epidemiologists did not test the cows or the environment for these other organisms, so they don't know for sure that the new cases are linked to Foundation Farm milk, but Keene said it's likely. "There is a long list of pathogens that people can get from raw milk," he said.
> 
> Four children who drank the milk were hospitalized with acute kidney failure, which is associated with _E. coli_ O157:H7. As of Fri 27 Apr 2012, they were still in the hospital, Keene said.
> 
> Two of the patients, aged 14 and 13, are Portland area middle schoolers. The others are 3 and one years old. A 5th child from Lane County, who drank the milk while visiting relatives in the Portland area, was hospitalized and released.
> 
> Foundation Farm, located on 5 acres in the Stafford area, had a herd-share operation for a least a year selling parts of cows to 48 families. In return, they had regular access to the raw milk.
> 
> Health officials also interviewed most of the families. They were surprised that a person continued to drink the milk even after being advised that it was contaminated. Keene said the 2nd patient went looking for a new source.
> 
> Just under 3 percent of Oregonians drink raw milk, according to a survey by Oregon Public Health. They tend to be passionate about it, despite public warnings.
> 
> "We've documented yet another unfortunate incident where people missed the boat on one of the great advances in public health, pasteurization," Keene said.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can get more information at :
> http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/ho...aw-milk-much-more-likely-cause-illness-8.html


You left these parts out, why?

*It is not clear whether these illnesses came from the farm's raw milk or from another source*, says William Keene, Senior Epidemiologist at the Oregon Public Health Division. And without more than one illness, neither of these cases will be classified as part of an outbreak.

or this:

However, when investigating last month's E. coli outbreak linked to the farm, there were some *unconfirmed illnesses *that Keene says were not definitively identified as E. coli.


----------



## haypoint

JeffreyD said:


> You left these parts out, why?
> 
> *It is not clear whether these illnesses came from the farm's raw milk or from another source*, says William Keene, Senior Epidemiologist at the Oregon Public Health Division. And without more than one illness, neither of these cases will be classified as part of an outbreak.
> 
> or this:
> 
> However, when investigating last month's E. coli outbreak linked to the farm, there were some *unconfirmed illnesses *that Keene says were not definitively identified as E. coli.


The statement "It is not clear whether these illnesses came from the farm's raw milk or from another source" was about the two guys that had Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium. The Health Department had been testing for e coli and it would be too late to go back and test those samples for Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium. The e coli they are very clear on. 
In addition to the 18 that they proved came from that farm, several others got sick but were not tested and therefore not definitively a part of that same outbreak. 

I gave the links, even added more links. Not hiding anything. Would be easier to explain if the readers understood the culture process and the reasons for the limited testing.


----------



## haypoint

JeffreyD said:


> Where's the rest of the pictures of their farm?


This was the only photo I saw, it was with the newspaper article. Why do you ask?
Perhaps it is their whole farm.


----------



## Wags

We get that you hate raw milk haypoint. :bdh:

What this whole raw vs. pasteurized argument boils down to - FREEDOM to CHOOSE. You want to take away people's right to choose, and some don't want to give up that right.


----------



## JeffreyD

haypoint said:


> This was the only photo I saw, it was with the newspaper article. Why do you ask?
> Perhaps it is their whole farm.


It's obvious that the picture you posted is only a small part of the farm. You can see that the electric fencing goes beyound the image boundry. It appears that the picture taker wants us to think that the liquid in the picture is waste product and that is how the cows are being contaminated. But, it's only 1 picture, i would like to see more of their farm. The chicken trailer and pen look good.


----------



## JeffreyD

haypoint said:


> The statement "It is not clear whether these illnesses came from the farm's raw milk or from another source" was about the two guys that had Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium. The Health Department had been testing for e coli and it would be too late to go back and test those samples for Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium. The e coli they are very clear on.
> In addition to the 18 that they proved came from that farm, several others got sick but were not tested and therefore not definitively a part of that same outbreak.
> 
> I gave the links, even added more links. Not hiding anything. Would be easier to explain if the readers understood the culture process and the reasons for the limited testing.


I read the article and that made me wounder why you didn't mention these statements, yet you posted most of the article, including the picture. You said your not hiding anything, so why did you omit these statements? Do you have an agenda that these statements disagree with? Just curious.


----------



## Callieslamb

I was under the impression that pretty much all farms and farm animals carry ecoli. Pretty much all fecal matter will have some ecoli. The problem is when it gets to be in large amounts. Saying the animals tested positive for ecoli is a mute point for me. Finding it the milk - might be. How much? In amounts enough to make people sick? They didn't say, did they?


----------



## haypoint

Callieslamb said:


> I was under the impression that pretty much all farms and farm animals carry ecoli. Pretty much all fecal matter will have some ecoli. The problem is when it gets to be in large amounts. Saying the animals tested positive for ecoli is a mute point for me. Finding it the milk - might be. How much? In amounts enough to make people sick? They didn't say, did they?


The amount of e coli to make a person sick varies. I guess if you land in the hospital and organs shut down, that is an e coli level high enough to make you sick.

Nice to hear that you think e coli in milk might be a problem.


----------



## haypoint

JeffreyD said:


> It's obvious that the picture you posted is only a small part of the farm. You can see that the electric fencing goes beyound the image boundry. It appears that the picture taker wants us to think that the liquid in the picture is waste product and that is how the cows are being contaminated. But, it's only 1 picture, i would like to see more of their farm. The chicken trailer and pen look good.


I didn't take the picture. I didn't write the article. I didn't advise the Health Officials on what samples to take. I just posted the news. You think I'm anti-raw milk, do you now think the reporter is anti-raw milk and took a photo to smear the farm?

From the article I posted, " Foundation Farm, located on five acres in the Stafford area" That photo didn't show all of their 5 acres, but it showed a good bit of it.


----------



## haypoint

JeffreyD said:


> It's obvious that the picture you posted is only a small part of the farm. You can see that the electric fencing goes beyound the image boundry. It appears that the picture taker wants us to think that the liquid in the picture is waste product and that is how the cows are being contaminated. But, it's only 1 picture, i would like to see more of their farm. The chicken trailer and pen look good.


Well, drive up there and take a look. Feel free to post photos of the farm. Heck, post some photos of your trip. I hear the coast is beautiful this time of the year.


----------



## Hollowdweller

Wags said:


> We get that you hate raw milk haypoint. :bdh:
> 
> What this whole raw vs. pasteurized argument boils down to - FREEDOM to CHOOSE. You want to take away people's right to choose, and some don't want to give up that right.


Right. I think that as long as the person knows there is a potential risk there......


----------



## naturelover

Haypoint, a question for you.

What is your biggest objection? Are you objecting to the fact that raw milk can be dangerous or are you objecting to the people who want to drink raw milk?

.


----------



## kendall j

I think this fits here:

&#8220;Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.&#8221;
-C.S. Lewis

If people want to take a risk and get sick, why don't you just get over it? Are they forcing you to drink ram milk? They're no? Oh, I didn't think so.


----------



## haypoint

naturelover said:


> Haypoint, a question for you.
> 
> What is your biggest objection? Are you objecting to the fact that raw milk can be dangerous or are you objecting to the people who want to drink raw milk?
> 
> .


Nope, you can drink yourself silly on all the raw milk you want. But when you start marketing it to others, I have a big concern. Your little "cottage industry" threatens the whole milk industry. A collection of hard working farmers that have worked hard to insure that their product is safe. Since all the vitamins and minerals remain after pasteurization, what's the point?

Most consumers are not going to study up on milk borne pathogens before they buy raw milk. Likewise, an outbreak, causing hospitalization, from raw milk will cause folks to stop buying the pasteurized product. Just as Florida spinach suffered from e coli tainted California spinach. 

Where raw milk is illegal, when people get sick they keep their lip buttoned. In places that allow it, reports come with some regularity. 

Do think the parents of the children that lay in hospital beds, with failed livers, expected that to be the risk they were going to be taking?

The OR raw milk was sold through a herd share. I see through that shell game. They are buying milk, not buying shares. So don't play that slight of hand magic trick.

But mostly, I just want to help keep everyone aware of what is going on beyond their gate post.


----------



## naturelover

haypoint said:


> Nope, you can drink yourself silly on all the raw milk you want. But when you start marketing it to others, I have a big concern. Your little "cottage industry" threatens the whole milk industry. A collection of hard working farmers that have worked hard to insure that their product is safe. Since all the vitamins and minerals remain after pasteurization, what's the point?
> 
> Most consumers are not going to study up on milk borne pathogens before they buy raw milk. Likewise, an outbreak, causing hospitalization, from raw milk will cause folks to stop buying the pasteurized product. Just as Florida spinach suffered from e coli tainted California spinach.
> 
> Where raw milk is illegal, when people get sick they keep their lip buttoned. In places that allow it, reports come with some regularity.
> 
> Do think the parents of the children that lay in hospital beds, with failed livers, expected that to be the risk they were going to be taking?
> 
> The OR raw milk was sold through a herd share. I see through that shell game. They are buying milk, not buying shares. So don't play that slight of hand magic trick.


I don't have any kind of cottage industry. I don't buy or drink raw milk and will never intentionally do so. I value my health too much to take that kind of risk with it. 

That is my personal choice. However, if I wanted to take a risk with my health and drink raw milk I want the freedom to make that choice for myself. I don't want somebody else telling me what foods I'm allowed to consume.

I don't agree with your premise that most consumers are not going to study up on milk borne pathogens before they buy raw milk. Every adult in this society knows about pasteurization and the reasons for it. Adults who buy and drink raw milk know they're taking a risk with their health. The parents who knowingly give raw milk to their children know they're taking a risk with their child's health.

That is their choice and I think adults should have the freedom to make that choice for themselves. I also think adult people who deliberately make poor health choices for their children who are too young to make healthy choices for themselves don't deserve to have children in their care. If their children get sick because of the parents intentional negligence then the parents should be charged with criminal negligence and have their children removed from their custody. If their children die because of the parents intentional negligence then the parents should be charged and convicted of murder. 

I don't believe that somebody's raw milk "cottage industry" threatens the whole milk industry. I don't believe that a health outbreak due to drinking raw milk will cause other people to stop drinking pasteurized milk. I think it will make more people want to avoid raw milk and only drink pasteurized milk.

I think you may be more concerned about the pasteurized milk industry losing money to raw milk producers than you are about the health of people who drink raw milk. That's how it sounds to me.

.


----------



## gracie88

> Where raw milk is illegal, when people get sick they keep their lip buttoned. In places that allow it, reports come with some regularity.


It seems like, then, it's best to make it legal so it's not shrouded in secrecy and given credit for mysterious healing powers.


----------



## naturelover

Perhaps it should come under the same laws and regulations as alcohol.

.


----------



## haypoint

naturelover said:


> I don't have any kind of cottage industry. I don't buy or drink raw milk and will never intentionally do so. I value my health too much to take that kind of risk with it.
> 
> That is my personal choice. However, if I wanted to take a risk with my health and drink raw milk I want the freedom to make that choice for myself. I don't want somebody else telling me what foods I'm allowed to consume.
> 
> I don't agree with your premise that most consumers are not going to study up on milk borne pathogens before they buy raw milk. Every adult in this society knows about pasteurization and the reasons for it. Adults who buy and drink raw milk know they're taking a risk with their health. The parents who knowingly give raw milk to their children know they're taking a risk with their child's health.
> 
> That is their choice and I think adults should have the freedom to make that choice for themselves. I also think adult people who deliberately make poor health choices for their children who are too young to make healthy choices for themselves don't deserve to have children in their care. If their children get sick because of the parents intentional negligence then the parents should be charged with criminal negligence and have their children removed from their custody. If their children die because of the parents intentional negligence then the parents should be charged and convicted of murder.
> 
> I don't believe that somebody's raw milk "cottage industry" threatens the whole milk industry. I don't believe that a health outbreak due to drinking raw milk will cause other people to stop drinking pasteurized milk. I think it will make more people want to avoid raw milk and only drink pasteurized milk.
> 
> I think you may be more concerned about the pasteurized milk industry losing money to raw milk producers than you are about the health of people who drink raw milk. That's how it sounds to me.
> 
> .


I guess weâll have to agree to disagree. I think you are wrong. Yup, from front to back, top to bottom, wrong. But thatâs fine.
I understand that the raw milk âcottage industryâ is a tiny part of the milk industry and when you see that it isnât 1% of the total, youâll see that it isnât market share that concerns the dairy farmers. It is the loss of money caused by a reduced demand for their product brought on by raw milk borne illnesses.
Consumers stopped buying pork when swine flu went around, even though it had nothing to do with pigs. So, milk and cheese caused illnesses will impact the dairy farmer that depend on a steady demand for pasteurized milk.
We live in a country where people win lawsuits for hot coffee. I donât believe the parents of a child that is lying in a hospital on life support is going to say, â Oh well, I should have known the risks, I guess thatâs the way it goesâ¦.â Heck no, they are going to sue the farm, the owners and anyone else that gets in the way.
Are you saying that if a parent feeds their child raw milk and they die, the parents should be tried for murder? Then, by that logic, even exposing them to the potential would be cause for attempted murder or at the very least negligence. 
Next time you are shopping ask a stranger if that product has corn sugar in it. Just pick any product. Most folks donât read the ingredients for the food they eat. Yet you are telling me that people will read beyond the raw milk hype and study up on the variety of milk borne pathogens? There are a few on HT that think milk is pasteurized because dairy farms are dirty. Thatâs not what I would call âunderstanding the reasons.
I wish we could ask the parents of the children that have been sickened by raw milk over this past year. I doubt weâd hear them say, â I knew the risks, but I fed it to my children anyway.â
It isnât like raw milk is the only thing that consumers are protected from. Lots of things have regulations and minimum standards.
But we all know this is beating a dead horse. Each time I run across another case of raw milk making groups of people sick, Iâll add it to the end of this thread. If you want to learn about the latest outbreak, itâll be there. If you donât like to read that stuff, the title for this thread warns you.


----------



## willow_girl

> What is your biggest objection? Are you objecting to the fact that raw milk can be dangerous or are you objecting to the people who want to drink raw milk?


Dunno about Haypoint, but I don't want to see people get sick. 

I have a friend who is partly paralyzed from Guillain-Barre syndrome after drinking contaminated raw milk while in Europe. 

But I don't think people should be legally restricted from raw milk, the same way I don't think they should be ticketed for failing to wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet. 

My compassionate side wants people to be educated so they hopefully will make the right choice and avoid harm.

My not-so-compassionate side says, "Let Darwin's Law do its job." :shrug:


----------



## southerngurl

So, those who are against raw milk sales. Are you against sales of fresh greens? Sprouts? Hamburgers?

*According the CDC's website, there have been more food born deaths from those than raw milk*. In fact, there have been NO deaths from milk on their records which go back like 16 years or maybe more, I forget. No deaths. 

Are you aware that people have been sickened by pasteurized milk too? Why do you hold raw milk to a different standard than other foods? There IS NO safe food! 

Statistically, from what I have looked at on the CDC's website, the biggest dangers in food born illness are greens and hamburger meat. So why are you not harping on those? It's simple, it's a stigma despite facts. 

This also tends to be a self fulfilling prophecy. *If someone becomes ill and consumed raw milk, raw milk is blamed whether proven as the cause or not, even in situations where the bacteria strain that sickened people are never found on the farm, even when people who didn't drink raw milk got the same illness. * there are several layers of immunity built into raw milk that make it far safer than people assume. It's not that it can never make you sick but it's extremely rare, you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it. 

There is NO guaranteed food. No guarantees in life. So leave people alone and let them buy whatever food they want. You will never get everyone to agree, that's why we should be able to make our own decisions for ourselves. Otherwise you are imposing your judgment on someone else and you don't have a right to do that because you are not superior to them. You're not their boss.


----------



## southerngurl

Haypoint, you say a person can drink all the raw milk they want, but not sell it. Well, most people in this country are not able to produce their own milk. So if they can 't buy it, they can't drink it. 

Also, vitamins and minerals are FAR from all the nutrients in food- and YES vitamins are lost. But minerals don't stand alone either. There are other nutrients in food that allow them to be absorbed and properly utilized. It's a whole package and some of it is lost when you cook it. It's not the end of the world, but it's not optimum either.


----------



## haypoint

"Raw milk is essentially a suspension of fecal organisms in a nutrient broth," explains Keene. "Milk is a great growth medium for bacteria and raw milk is always contaminated with fecal-oral organisms. It's a question of whether that particular tank has got something from an animal that happened to be shedding cryptosporidium or E. coli or whatever."
Meat is cooked and vegetables are washed. What yo gonna do with milk? Hundreds of tons of vegetables and hundreds of tons of hamburger and millions of gallons of pasteurized milk are consumed every day. You aren&#8217;t really going to try to compare that to the comparatively tiny amount of raw milk consumed, are you? Generally, if you&#8217;d check, illnesses from pasteurized milk are because of a failure to properly pasteurize it. If you want to be fair, those illnesses are technically raw milk illnesses. Right?
Show me a study that proves vitamins are lost in pasteurization. Heck, show an unbiased study that proves anything helpful, except bacteria, is lost in pasteurization. The losses you claim aren&#8217;t &#8220;the end of the world&#8221;, but for those kids fighting for their lives, it might be. 
You claim, &#8220;you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it.&#8221; Please support your claim. I don&#8217;t believe it to be true.
When an infected batch of raw milk goes out, it takes a few days before people get sick. Then getting to a doctor and then hospital, then the local Health Department. Only when several people come down with something beyond stomach flu, do they start sampling the food in the stores they shopped in, the restaurants, the food in your house. If the milk is gone, there is no link to the milk. If milk remains, the Health Department isn&#8217;t CSI, they will run a few tests on a few things and that&#8217;s it. This takes time. Eventually, they&#8217;ll check the bulk tank at the farm, if the earlier samples showed e Coli. That batch might have gotten a gob of manure in it, maybe not. That cow might still be shedding cryptosporidium, maybe not. They might not even test for it. 
Just because 20 of the 40 people that had herd shares got sick and no one else in the community got sick, I can feel safe that the sickness came from the milk. But CDC and the Local Health Department can&#8217;t make that claim. Only the cases that are ongoing are provable because the bacteria can be found in the samples over and over. They know e coli was in the milk and made people sick. They can&#8217;t prove that the cryptosporidium was there, too. So, the illnesses reported by the CDC are just the tip of a much larger e coli and cryptosporidium and campylobacter iceberg.

You and I will never get everyone to agree on our beliefs, but we should be able to express our own beliefs and make decisions for ourselves. Don't you see you are imposing your judgment on me and you don't have a right to do that because you are not superior to me. You're not my boss. If the news reports I have posted about raw milk troubles you, do not read them. I put that in the title of this thread. Didn't you read it?


----------



## southerngurl

I don't know what you are talking about in your last paragraph. What judgement did I pass? You can drink pasteurized milk, I don't care. You can sell pasteurized milk as far as I'm concerned. Where did I try to tell anyone what to do (other than not force their own judgment on others)? I want the same consideration from those who are afraid of raw milk. I cook milk sometimes in soup etc. I'm not telling you what to do. You're not making sense to me. I don't argue for the sake of arguing. I'm simply putting forth a viewpoint with information as to why I've came to my conclusion. I'm not here to be antagonistic. 

Look, I've been through this argument before. I take all this time to compile facts to prove my point and you know what the opposing side says? Nothing. It's a real pain in the backside for not much in return. 

But I'll probably end up doing it again anyway. So I'll start with this. 



> Meat is cooked and vegetables are washed.


And people still got sick. So it's no guarantee right? And less guarantee, statistically, than drinking milk raw. Washing vegetables doesn't kill e coli anyway. 


> "Raw milk is essentially a suspension of fecal organisms in a nutrient broth," explains Keene. "Milk is a great growth medium for bacteria and raw milk is always contaminated with fecal-oral organisms. It's a question of whether that particular tank has got something from an animal that happened to be shedding cryptosporidium or E. coli or whatever."


 Ok, this is partially, technically true, but deceiving. RAW milk is a great growth medium for bacteria, but NOT that bad ones she is talking about. But rather a great growth medium for good guys. Did you know that you can squirt lysteria in a glass of raw milk and leave it at body temperature and all the lysteria will be dead in 48 hours? It is NOT a good growth medium for pathological bacteria, it is HIGHLY unfriendly to bad guys. There are multiple levels of immunity, just like in our body. We get all kinds of bad guys in our bodies, the only reason we don't rot away is our immunity.

My statement about the danger of driving vs drinking raw milk is a statistical one. How many people died driving cars last year? Plenty. How many died drinking raw milk last year? According to the CDC, none. So put that in a percentage and there you go. 

Ok, below is a copy of some information I put together for another raw milk argument so some will apply and some is overlap. But I don't have time to go through it all again. It even hits on what you said about improperly pasteurized milk (NO, it's NOT raw milk, improperly pasteurized milk is the most dangerous of all none of the benefits of raw milk, none of the benefits of pasteurized milk, all of the dangers of both). 
---------------------------
Now, if you don&#8217;t believe the sworn statements from the microbiologist, who specializes in food safety, that&#8217;s fine. But I&#8217;m not going on wild goose chases after this.







I know how that goes.. People can do more research on their own time and see what they feel is best. However, keep in mind that a lot of the data is scewed. There are some common deceptive situations.* A:* often the outbreak will be blamed on raw milk *with NO proof*. There have been multiple situations where they swabbed like crazy trying to find the pathogen in a dairy and could not. Morningland Dairy in Missouri was one such case (they couldn&#8217;t even find lysteria in the *sink drain* they swabbed- of course, that didn&#8217;t stop them from putting them out of business- mind you there were no sicknesses either) and I have read of others, one was e coli. Once again, the man&#8217;s milk was blamed even though they couldn&#8217;t find the strain that made the child sick on his farm. *B:* Sometimes products are called raw when they are not technically raw, for example, IMPROPERLY pasteurized milk. This is most dangerous because it can kill off the raw milk&#8217;s immunity (white blood cells, probiotics and several enzymes) yet still leave bad guys behind, perfect environment for them to flourish. In this situation, they just say &#8220;raw milk&#8221; caused the outbreak when if the milk was truly raw, the outbreak would have likely been prevented. Confusing to someone doing research on it. 

Another thing to consider. Has anyone ever gotten sick from raw milk? Yes. Has anyone ever gotten sick from cantaloupe? Peanut butter? Pasteurized milk? Lettuce? Alfalfa sprouts? Hot dogs? Yes. *Why do we hold raw milk to a different standard than other foods?* 

As for people getting sick from pasteurized milk, even the CDC will reluctantly admit that. 
Here is an example story:
http://www.marlerblog.com/uploads/file/Attachment%20No_%201.pdf

Also, according to the CDC&#8217;s own website, there have not been any deaths from raw milk in the last 14 years that they show records for. Yet, the vast majority of the deaths listed are from other foods still considered okey dokey, mainly ground beef and greens. One poor person died from eating watermelon in a restaurant, 23 were hospitalized. Looking at the CDC&#8217;s information, beef and greens are what to avoid if you are afraid of death from food born illness. CDC - NORS:Foodborne Outbreak Online Database (FOOD)

And here is the information from the microbiologist. 
http://www.realmilk.com/documents/expert-testimony-0508.pdf

Dr Beal&#8217;s testimony in this court case begins on page 38- but the entire thing is a great read. HTH Living is risky. 

Below are some quotes.

---------From page 49:----------

"5 Q. Have you published research on that subject? 
6 A. Yes, I have. *If Listeria, for example, is 
7 inoculated into raw milk, then they're killed actively by 
8 the raw milk's natural antimicrobial systems. 
9 Q. Did you say killed? 
10 A. Killed, yes.* 
11 Q. How much time does it take before the Listeria 
12 is killed? 
13 A. If you inoculate 10,000 Listeria into raw milk, 
14 then in 48 hours they're all killed. That's at body 
15 temperature. "  
---------From Pages 56-58-----

*"Q. Let's get back to the end of Dr. Beals's 17 testimony, then, when he talked about the infective dose. 18 
A. Yes. 19 
Q. Does that infective dose apply to raw milk? 20 
A. No. 21 
Q. And why not? 22 
A. I think what the authorities are talking about 23 is infective dose to the most susceptible individual in 24 the community, the nonimmune individual, and the most 25 susceptible foods, the cooked foods. Yes, the infective 
Page: 57 1 dose is one organism under those conditions. Not ten, 2 probably one. But when we talk about a food that has -- 3 a living food that has inbuilt immunity, the infective 4 dose is not ten, it's not a hundred, it's not a thousand 5 even. You have to give a huge dose of E. coli, something 6 like ten million, to make someone sick, and then it's not 7 an infective dose, it's a toxic dose. 8 
Q. And what's the difference? 9 
A. The difference is a toxic dose is you're giving 10 sufficient of the chemical in the cell surface of E. coli 11 to cause a reaction in the gut, and it's that reaction 12 that then can lead later to infection. But in a healthy 13 individual it's almost impossible -- in fact, ten million 14 E. coli, if that's present in milk, the milk smells so 15 bad that you would not drink it. So we've got a very 16 good inbuilt food safety system right here in our 17 olfactory. It's just that modern food systems tend to 18 try to mask that olfactory with all sorts of flavors and 19 odors. And so we can be tricked sometimes. We can be 20 drinking pasteurized milk with a chocolate flavor, and it 21 could have a high infective dose in it, and the olfactory 22 will not detect it. But if it's raw milk, plain milk, 23 then, yes, it would be detected. 24 
Q. Does raw milk with a built-in immunity system, 25 then? 
Page: 58 1 
A. Yes, it does. 2 *
Q. And because of that immunity system, can raw 3 milk be subjected to a less, quote, clean environment? 4 A. Yes, definitely. And that's part of the reason 5 I brought this apple here. I can leave this apple 6 sitting around for I don't know how many weeks in 7 California, but certainly at home an apple or orange can 8 sit on the kitchen table or outside for many days and 9 still be fine to eat. Not a health hazard, not a food 10 safety issue. But if we cook that product, then we 11 cannot do that. We have to protect it from 12 contamination, from infection, from the environment 13 because it has no longer living immunity in the apple. 14 The same is true of raw milk." 

--------------Page 58-59-------------

Because we know many foods, 22 fermented foods, for example -- if we take yogurt, for 23 example,* we can inoculate yogurt with ten thousand E. 24 coli pathogens*, and 24 hours later they'll all be dead. 25 In fact, the industry does this routinely. They often
Page: 59 1 make a batch of yogurt where the plant was not clean, but 2 you simply keep the product and retest it in 24 hours, 3 and it will be clear.


----------



## southerngurl

And no study is needed to show vitamins are lost, it's well known, for example, that vitamin C is destroyed by heat. Milk doesn't have some magical thing that changes that.


----------



## zant

Personally,I will only drink raw milk directly from a breast......


----------



## dollmaker

zant said:


> Personally,I will only drink raw milk directly from a breast......


Does your mom know you're posting here?


----------



## haypoint

Believe or don't. Here are the facts. They'll be facts until you prove them wrong, but you can't.

Vitamins in milk

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-specificinformation/milksafety/ucm122062.ht

Q. Is it safe to consume raw milk?
A. No. FDA and other health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics agree that raw milk is unsafe because it can contain disease-causing pathogens, including: Enterotoxigenic Staphylococcus aureus, Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella species, E. coli, Listeria monocytogenes, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Mycobacterium bovis, Brucella species, Coxiella Burnetii, Yersinia enterocolitica.
Illnesses caused by these bacteria can be especially problematic for infants, young children, the elderly, and the immunocompromised. One complication that can arise as a result of infection with E. coli O157:H7 is hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), which can cause acute renal failure, especially in the very young or the elderly.
Q. Have any illnesses or deaths been caused by consuming raw milk products?
A.	Based on CDC data, literature, and state and local reports, FDA compiled a list of outbreaks that occurred in the U.S. from 1987 to September 2010. During this period, there were at least 133 outbreaks due to the consumption of raw milk and raw milk products. *These outbreaks caused 2,659 cases of illnesses, 269 hospitalizations, 3 deaths, 6 stillbirths and 2 miscarriages. Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with raw milk likely is greater.*
Q. Are there any benefits to drinking raw milk?
A. No. As a science-based regulatory agency, the FDA looks to the scientific literature for information on benefits and risks associated with raw milk. While the perceived nutritional and health benefits of raw milk consumption have not been scientifically substantiated, the health risks are clear. Please see http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/...umerInformationAboutMilkSafety/ucm247991.htm1 for more information.


----------



## DJ in WA

naturelover said:


> Haypoint, a question for you.
> 
> What is your biggest objection? Are you objecting to the fact that raw milk can be dangerous or are you objecting to the people who want to drink raw milk?
> 
> .


If you look at Haypoint's threads, you will see that he wants pretty much everything run by government. He searches the internet looking for ways to promote the USDA.

I forget the program he was promoting a week or two ago, but he was dismayed that we all didn't weren't jumping for joy at more free government money.

I suspect he works for the government or somehow benefits. I doubt he'll be reporting any outbreaks from government inspected products. Definitely biased.

If you want to expand government, you have to find all sorts of threats and provide people protection. Basic psychology. Scare people and be their savior.

Nobody should take any risks. No personal responsibility. Just look for the government approved stamp on the product, shut off your brain, and partake.

Only problem is with all these thousands of wonderful programs, we will be broke, and they will have to be cut, and then the people will be even more helpless.

If you want power, play off people's fears.



> The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
> ~H. L. Mencken
> 
> Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."
> 
> Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it. ~George Bernard Shaw
> 
> H. L. Mencken:
> The average man does not want to be free. He simply wants to be safe.
> 
> "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
> - Daniel Webster


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> If you look at Haypoint's threads, you will see that he wants pretty much everything run by government. He searches the internet looking for ways to promote the USDA.
> 
> I forget the program he was promoting a week or two ago, but he was dismayed that we all didn't weren't jumping for joy at more free government money.
> 
> I suspect he works for the government or somehow benefits. I doubt he'll be reporting any outbreaks from government inspected products. Definitely biased.
> 
> If you want to expand government, you have to find all sorts of threats and provide people protection. Basic psychology. Scare people and be their savior.
> 
> Nobody should take any risks. No personal responsibility. Just look for the government approved stamp on the product, shut off your brain, and partake.
> 
> Only problem is with all these thousands of wonderful programs, we will be broke, and they will have to be cut, and then the people will be even more helpless.
> 
> If you want power, play off people's fears.


I see a lot of fear and hate towards the government. Easy targets. But i try to show that there are two sides to many things. You say Monsanto is the devil, I say there are benifits to modern agriculture. You say GMO is ruining the food supply, I ask where is the proof. you say Big Ag has taken over agriculture, I say small farms have them out numbered by a huge margin. 

Perhaps to some, turning back the hands of time to those wonderful days of yester year sounds great. A chance to do things like grandpa did them. Fine, as long as your in-town job can support it. But if you want to stay on the Small Farm, you'll have to sweep away the myths.
If what the USDA does stays a mystery, it is easy to think of them as an uncaring monster out to defeat you. I'd rather learn about it and get it to work for me rather than complaining about stuff that isn't even real.

I've been at this homesteading thing since 1975. I've come to realize that the way I imagined things to be is sometimes different from what it really is. That is strong medicine. Reality dashes pipe dreams. I see a lot of class warfare. Doesn't need to be. 

So, when I see a disease outbreak in NC horses, I post about it in the equine section. When I see a program to help Small Farmers, I post that. I don't expect you to take my word about another e coli outbreak in raw milk, I'll post the details from the news. I thought if you were tired of beating this dead horse you would bypass this thread, I warned you.


----------



## haypoint

zant said:


> Personally,I will only drink raw milk directly from a breast......


I'm all for drinking the milk from your place, but I think you'll run into trouble buying milk, directly from a breast, from sources off your own farm.ound:


----------



## southerngurl

You didn't address anything I said... then you post government conclusions (not facts) that in no way refute or address what I posted. So I'll just refer you back to it.


----------



## haypoint

southerngurl said:


> You didn't address anything I said... then you post government conclusions (not facts) that in no way refute or address what I posted. So I'll just refer you back to it.



In reply to " And no study is needed to show vitamins are lost, it's well known, for example, that vitamin C is destroyed by heat. Milk doesn't have some magical thing that changes that."


http://www.milkfacts.info/Milk Composition/VitaminsMinerals.htm

Read the part about the effects of heat treatment on milk. There is very little Vit C in milk, in the first place and very little is lost in pasteurization.


----------



## haypoint

southerngurl said:


> You didn't address anything I said... then you post government conclusions (not facts) that in no way refute or address what I posted. So I'll just refer you back to it.


OK, I'll reply to the longer post that you took so much trouble to assemble. 
You feel righteous to post your viewpoint, âI'm simply putting forth a viewpoint with information as to why I've came to my conclusion. I'm not here to be antagonistic.â Donât ya think others can have different viewpoints and develop other conclusions?eep:

I too have compiled facts and often get â Well, my grandpa drank it and never got sickâ replies. Iâm just interested in posting the recent news as it happens. If you feel the need to refute the facts, Iâll comment.
You state that washing vegetables doesnât kill e coli. Maybe not, but when you wash vegetables, much of the e coli goes down the drain. But we are getting a bit far afield.:hijacked:

This is an imperfect world we live in. I say we cook meat and wash vegetables and you say thatâs no guarantee you wonât get sick. You are right. But I still want the guy thatâs tossing my salad to wash his hands after taking a crap.:hammer:

You made a false statement and I called you on it and now you want to retract it and say something different. You said ââ¦you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it.â I showed the data âThese outbreaks caused 2,659 cases of illnesses, 269 hospitalizations, 3 deaths, 6 stillbirths and 2 miscarriages. Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with raw milk likely is greater.â 
Iâm sure people âdriving to get their milk hasnâtâ gotten that record beat, in actual numbers or as a percentage. :nono:

No one is holding raw milk to a different standard than peanuts, hotdogs, hamburger, cantaloupes or spinach. It gets drug off the shelves and a search is made and corrective action is done. Often with a business killing recall. There are regulations to protect the food supply, milk is no exception.
If raw milk kills Listeria (one of the many diseases and bacteria commonly found in raw milk) then why have there been so many documented cases of Listeria sicknesses from raw milk? Did they drink it too fresh, before the âgood guysâ could attack it and kill Listeria?

Well, if your proof that raw milk is safe is that a fresh apple keeps for weeks and a cooked apple rots in a few days, then I guess we have no more to discuss.


----------



## southerngurl

haypoint said:


> OK, I'll reply to the longer post that you took so much trouble to assemble.
> You feel righteous to post your viewpoint, &#8220;I'm simply putting forth a viewpoint with information as to why I've came to my conclusion. I'm not here to be antagonistic.&#8221; Don&#8217;t ya think others can have different viewpoints and develop other conclusions?eep:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. If you read what I wrote, I think that's what I said... You're arguing against things I haven't said, and not addressing a lot of what I _have_ said.
> 
> 
> 
> I too have compiled facts and often get &#8220; Well, my grandpa drank it and never got sick&#8221; replies. I&#8217;m just interested in posting the recent news as it happens. If you feel the need to refute the facts, I&#8217;ll comment.
> You state that washing vegetables doesn&#8217;t kill e coli. Maybe not, but when you wash vegetables, much of the e coli goes down the drain. But we are getting a bit far afield.:hijacked:
> 
> This is an imperfect world we live in. I say we cook meat and wash vegetables and you say that&#8217;s no guarantee you won&#8217;t get sick. You are right. But I still want the guy that&#8217;s tossing my salad to wash his hands after taking a crap.:hammer:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that's a precaution, there are precautions to take care in raw milk production too. So wouldn't the measurement of the success of said precautions be the outcome? Since raw milk has caused far less deaths than hamburgers, obviously the precautions work a lot better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You made a false statement and I called you on it and now you want to retract it and say something different. You said &#8220;&#8230;you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it.&#8221; I showed the data &#8220;These outbreaks caused 2,659 cases of illnesses, 269 hospitalizations, 3 deaths, 6 stillbirths and 2 miscarriages. Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with raw milk likely is greater.&#8221;
> I&#8217;m sure people &#8220;driving to get their milk hasn&#8217;t&#8221; gotten that record beat, in actual numbers or as a percentage. :nono:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "I'm sure" oh ok. Glad to know. And I never retracted my statement! It's more dangerous to drive than drink raw milk *statistically*. You say there have been three deaths? This is an incomplete fact because it doesn't give a time range. But I know those have to be more than 14 years ago since the CDC says there have been NO deaths from raw milk consumption in the last 14 years. So, 3 deaths in what? all time? Since I can go on google and in about 5 seconds fine ONE pastuerized milk incident that killed 3 people (Boston-area dairy linked to 3 deaths - USATODAY.com - of course the article talks about how bad raw milk is even when pasteurized milk just killed people)I guess raw milk is extremely safe in comparison. Pastuerized milk is also responsible for the largest outbreak of scarlet fever in history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one is holding raw milk to a different standard than peanuts, hotdogs, hamburger cantaloupes or spinach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SO you have changed your stance on allowing the sale of raw milk then? Because if you believe in allowing the sale of hamburgers peanuts etc. You cannot make the above statement without also believing in the sale of raw milk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It gets drug off the shelves and a search is made and corrective action is done. Often with a business killing recall. There are regulations to protect the food supply, milk is no exception.
> If raw milk kills Listeria (one of the many diseases and bacteria commonly found in raw milk) then why have there been so many documented cases of Listeria sicknesses from raw milk? Did they drink it too fresh, before the &#8220;good guys&#8221; could attack it and kill Listeria?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If airlines go through so many checks to make sure their airplanes are safe, why have people died in crashes? Like I said, no guarantees in life. Our next heartbeat is not guaranteed, but the chances are pretty good thankfully. I mean, it has a 100% success rate so far, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, if your proof that raw milk is safe is that a fresh apple keeps for weeks and a cooked apple rots in a few days, then I guess we have no more to discuss.
Click to expand...

Apparently only a small portion of my posts show up on your screen.


----------



## haypoint

&#8220;Since raw milk has caused far less deaths than hamburgers, obviously the precautions work a lot better.&#8221;
You can&#8217;t be serous? No one has died walking on the moon, yet hundreds have died walking in Central Park, therefore walking on the moon is safer? 
How can you compare the 25,000,000,000 pounds of beef to the few thousands of gallons of raw milk marketed in the US each year?
But now you say, &#8220;And I never retracted my statement! It's more dangerous to drive than drink raw milk statistically.&#8221; You were not making the comparison between driving and drinking milk. What you said, was, &#8220;you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it.&#8221; (post 36) The miles driven to pick up raw milk is such a tiny amount of the driving done by everyone going everywhere, that STATISTCALLY is invisible. If you had originally said what you said later, It's more dangerous to drive than drink raw milk statistically.&#8221; I might have let that false statement lay, but to equate the drive to get milk as more dangerous than drinking the raw milk, is coo coo talk. 
The data I used and included the web site was updated November 2011, so it does not include the March 2012 hospitalizations 

You feel you can make sarcastic remarks if I don&#8217;t comment on every statement you make, but you don&#8217;t bother to open the web sites that are the basis of my facts. Try this: 
Questions & Answers: Raw Milk milk&utm_content=2
It&#8217;s data goes back to 1987. Not exactly the dark ages.

You bring up a pasteurized milk incident where it was found that there was no Listeria in the milk after pasteurization and they were still searching how the Listeria got into the bottles and condemn the millions of gallons of pasteurized milk, when pasteurization was not at fault. Can&#8217;t blame that one on pasteurization, more like dirty bottling.
There are standards for most foods. Sanitation requirements that have proven to protect our national food supply. But with raw milk, the bacteria is often in the cow. No amount of cleanliness will prevent causing illness if there is campylobacter in the cow. When the cow sheds Listeria, it is in the milk.

Then you state, &#8220;If airlines go through so many checks to make sure their airplanes are safe, why people have died in crashes? Like I said, no guarantees in life. Our next heartbeat is not guaranteed, but the chances are pretty good thankfully. I mean, it has a 100% success rate so far, right?&#8221;

I know there are fuzzy peaches in the south, but you seem to have the market cornered on fuzzy math. Everyone knows air travel is safer than car travel be a huge margin. Want me to prove that car travel is safer than drinking raw milk? I&#8217;ve already stated that in out imperfect world, nothing is perfect. All we can do is attempt to reduce the risk. Every precaution is made to insure peanuts, spinach, cantaloupes, hamburger and milk is safe. One of the ways milk is made safe is by pasteurization. Over the past 80 years, it has worked pretty good. 

Would you eat raw hamburger from the store? It has a proven record of being hundreds of times safer than raw milk. When you compare the hundreds of millions of servings of hamburger sold to the number of reported sicknesses, then look at the few thousand glasses of raw milk consumed, you&#8217;d see a much greater percentage of illnesses from raw milk. 

Please cite your source for &#8221;Pasteurized milk is also responsible for the largest outbreak of scarlet fever in history.&#8221; I know pasteurization kills the scarlet fever bacteria and has prevented countless illnesses and deaths, so what you have to tell is the opposite. Do tell.


----------



## trulytricia

If I serve raw milk and someone gets sick I will blame myself and feel like a failure.

If I serve the store milk and someone gets sick I will blame the producers and want to sue them.

Laws do have a lot of power on how a person feels.


----------



## willow_girl

> And no study is needed to show vitamins are lost, it's well known, for example, that vitamin C is destroyed by heat. Milk doesn't have some magical thing that changes that.


Milk isn't a significant source of vitamin C in the first place. :shrug:


----------



## kasilofhome

I see a lot of fear and hate towards the government. Easy targets.

1. Define fear

I personally do not cower, Hey people who have fear --hide or try to "blend in" they do not stand their ground. Fear--No many are openly stating that the Goverment has usurped the right and responceablityies of private person leaving many privated persons and the next generation unable (due to lack of practice, skills, or a new found entitlement mentality) to be all that they can be --independant. The Blame others for their lack of sucess comes from person as High as a President still blaming Bush.

Yes the goverment is an easy target. If the goverment had not grown to the size of a barn at a target range but remained the size of a tin can maybe fewer people would hit the target.

Hay guess what if we all promise NOT to market or supply you with our homestead stuff will you be happy or is it that you want to prevent persons to be free enough to buy what they want. I buy things that have hurt me--broke a glass got a cut --I guess someone should come along and prevent me from buying glass glasses. 

FYI as disturbing as it is I promise you that every person who drinks a glass of store milk will be dead in 125 year and that is something I am willing to bet on. Life involes risks. Are you afraid to live freely?


----------



## Lazydaisy67

I think it's a smart choice for cow or goat owners NOT to sell their milk raw. There are ways around that, like if the person "leases" your goat or you sell it to them along with a release that says you're selling it for 'animal consumption only'. I still don't think it's a good idea. I have goats, milk them, and my family drinks the milk raw. We've never gotten sick (knock on wood) but I don't sell it. I'm too afraid that A: somebody would get sick, and B: the gubberment would storm in and take my goats away. 

The problem I have is with laws that make it illegal for me to drink my own raw milk or my own home-grown veggies, or my own fruit. That's just against everything I hold to be "the American Dream"


----------



## Wanda

Lazydaisy67 said:


> I think it's a smart choice for cow or goat owners NOT to sell their milk raw. There are ways around that, like if the person "leases" your goat or you sell it to them along with a release that says you're selling it for 'animal consumption only'. I still don't think it's a good idea. I have goats, milk them, and my family drinks the milk raw. We've never gotten sick (knock on wood) but I don't sell it. I'm too afraid that A: somebody would get sick, and B: the gubberment would storm in and take my goats away.
> 
> The problem I have is with laws that make it illegal for me to drink my own raw milk or my own home-grown veggies, or my own fruit. That's just against everything I hold to be "the American Dream"





What law says that you can not consume produce or milk that YOU produced on your premises?


----------



## Lazydaisy67

Wisconsin has been battling it. The definition of their law is that raw milk is not safe for human consumption, your cow, your milk, your consumption, it's illegal in WI. I have a feeling other states are not far behind.

http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/20...ules-no-right-to-own-a-cow-or-drink-its-milk/


----------



## sammyd

BS
WI law has always been that it is illegal to sell other than incidental sales.
That whole deal was about some folks who tried to slide around the law by using cow shares which have been illegal for some time.


----------



## southerngurl

> But now you say, &#8220;And I never retracted my statement! It's more dangerous to drive than drink raw milk statistically.&#8221; You were not making the comparison between driving and drinking milk. What you said, was, &#8220;you are in more danger on the drive to pick up raw milk than when you drink it.&#8221; (post 36) The miles driven to pick up raw milk is such a tiny amount of the driving done by everyone going everywhere, that STATISTCALLY is invisible. If you had originally said what you said later, It's more dangerous to drive than drink raw milk statistically.&#8221; I might have let that false statement lay, but to equate the drive to get milk as more dangerous than drinking the raw milk, is coo coo talk.


I'll go over this one again because it should be an easy point to agree on.

You still are not addressing what I've said before for the most part. You are doing a lot of comparing apples to oranges. For example, far far more people drink raw milk than have walked ont he moon. 

*But back to the above point to keep it on just one. There is no correlation between the statistical chance of crashing and your intentions on what you are going to do when you get there.* 

So, to put this in a formula, one would simply add up all the car crash deaths in the last 15 years, and divide it by all the miles driven in the last 15 years. This gives an average of deaths per mile, or whichever quantity of miles you choose. With me so far? If not, check out this page comparing risks of driving and flying and see how they actually came up with a statistic of deaths per 100 million miles, which in 2004 in Georgia was 1.47 (which I found to be rather shockingly safe btw). http://www.meretrix.com/~harry/flying/notes/safetyvsdriving.html (this page being about trying to prove flying is MORE dangerous than driving is strictly coincidental, not interested in that point at all, it's a completely different subject that I really have no interest in)

Then determine an average distance of miles driven to get said milk and multiply that number by your previous "deaths per mile" fraction.

Ok.

Now, you will have a fraction that you can compare with ZERO and find that drinking the milk has a statistically smaller chance of killing you than driving to get said milk. Unless you are saying miles driven to milk are safer than other miles driven which is, obviously, most silly.

Since the deaths per X miles is a *positive* number it's going to be more than the zero deaths in that chosen time frame, you are statistically in more danger of dying driving to get your milk, than drinking your milk.


----------



## southerngurl

willow_girl said:


> Milk isn't a significant source of vitamin C in the first place. :shrug:


... and that wasn't the point was it? The argument was none were lost. That was something obvious off the top of my head. There are lots of other nutrients lost and altered, one can do research on their own time.


----------



## southerngurl

willow_girl said:


> Dunno about Haypoint, but I don't want to see people get sick.
> 
> I have a friend who is partly paralyzed from Guillain-Barre syndrome after drinking contaminated raw milk while in Europe.
> 
> But I don't think people should be legally restricted from raw milk, the same way I don't think they should be ticketed for failing to wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet.


I appreciate that!

I am honestly wondering though, do you think the same of those injured or killed by contaminated greens etc? Or are raw milk injuries different. I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, it's a valid question. Because I just don't get the mentality I see on this issue. That somehow illness from foods like burgers and spinach(which have been actual deaths in recent years) are a terrible accident, but don't mean we should not sell them at all, just should be more clean about it. But when this happens (or is suspected ot have happened) because of raw milk, so many people think it should never be sold again.

I just don't see a call to cook all greens.


----------



## southerngurl

Haypoint, I've read those websites before. That's why I posted information with their points in mind. Just because the FDA says it doesn't make it true. Much of it is deceitfully worded, and the info I've given helps bring that out. I mean, when it comes to the FDA, we're talking about people who say silly things like if it cures a disease, it's a drug! LOL I mean, heck Oranges cure scurvy. 

Yes, I can be a little sarcastic sometimes. I don't mean to come off as hostile. It's just how I tend to think- I laugh a lot. I have made some efforts at not being too sarcastic but usually the more of a rush I'm in, the less editing there is. 

One of the points I haven't seen your response to.


> No one is holding raw milk to a different standard than peanuts, hotdogs, hamburger cantaloupes or spinach.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> SO you have changed your stance on allowing the sale of raw milk then? Because if you believe in allowing the sale of hamburgers peanuts etc. You cannot make the above statement without also believing in the sale of raw milk.
Click to expand...


----------



## gone-a-milkin

What are your odds of knowing in advance whether the person milking turned on the cooler in the tank before shift?
What are the odds of you knowing that #181 came fresh this week with a big load of bacteria and the 2nd shift milker put that all into the tank (which wasnt turned on after being pumped this morning).

What are the exact odds of those 2 things happening and you driving X miles to the farm to pick up a cocktail containing more then you are anticipating with your purchase?
What are the odds that you are going to have city visitors to your house with immune compromised systems?

Dont get me wrong, I drink raw milk and feed it to my family all the time. 

However.

I AM the milker. I KNOW who milked behind me. I know which cow came fresh on which day, and I am selective in which exact animals milk I serve my family.

My kids have an immune system built up from consuming raw foods and I have confidence in that and in my own awareness of herd health.

What are the chances of someone off the farm who buys their milk actually *knowing* all these things?

How many other stops are you making before you get your milk home?
Is it a mix of milk from all the animals, or is it only from the one you own rights to in your herdshare?
Did the farm have a labor shortage this week and make the sullen teen who doesnt give a (you know what) pull the milkshift?
Did they run out of sanitizer solution on Sunday and the truck comes on tuesday?
Is the waterheater running on both elements? 
There are just SO many things to consider in each and every shift of milking.
You need to trust the people who handle the animals. Really. 
Honestly, things can always go wrong. 
Most times it is just fine and dandy, statistically speaking. 
Right up until a situation where it really isnt.


Decide for yourself, but please be informed in deciding.
Just know the risks. Accept it or not. Trust your Farmer, or not. 

Freedom! But base it on education and not on heresay.

Just the opinion of someone who has milked a LOT of cows and seen some stuff go awry but who still drinks raw milk,
and has raised up their kids on the stuff.


----------



## DJ in WA

Gone-a-milkin, just about everyone is educated on such matters. How do I know that? Because government is in charge of education, and they don't mess up. The more government gets involved in education the better it gets, right?

There is no way our government would allow a kid to graduate without a solid understanding of food safety and sanitation, which will affect them the rest of their life. Government would encourage our kids to assess the source of all their food for quality and safety. They would ensure that all kids know proper food handling at home, so they never get sick.


----------



## southerngurl

Gone a milking, I've tasted plenty of infected milk. NOT recommending LOL. That's kind of my mastitis detector. I AM rethinking it after unknowingly tasting what turned out to be gangrene mastitis milk. But none of it made me sick.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

I have never been sickened by infected milk either, but I sure wouldnt bet on my city family having the same hardy guts that we do.

If they were to become ill on my account, I would feel too terrible.
That is part of the reason it seems unlikely to ever WIDELY market raw milk.


----------



## southerngurl

I agree, it should stay a small scale product. It doesn't lend itself well to mass production. I think most all food should be that way though. Direct to customer sales mean a better product for the consumer, and a better price for the producer. Not to mention small scale growing is more enjoyable for the producer IHO.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

Right this minute I am in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex (way out of my element, BTW)
and I dont see how the folks here (just for example) could ever get access to a safe source for raw dairy products.
There are so many people. It isn't 'dairy country'. The weather is hot. Only a small percentage of these folks could find a source for raw dairy.
It just isnt that feasible to make it widely available here.

It is my opinion that raw milk illnesses *DO* negatively impact dairy sales as a whole.
They SHOULDN"T, but lots of people base their buying on fear.
We have seen it over and over.
That bothers the milk councils and dairy boards. Of course it does.


----------



## Lazydaisy67

sammyd said:


> BS
> WI law has always been that it is illegal to sell other than incidental sales.
> That whole deal was about some folks who tried to slide around the law by using cow shares which have been illegal for some time.


I thought the article was important not as much from the standpoint of a couple of people trying to slide under the law, but rather the judges own definition of its parameters. For any judge, in any case to state that any individual DOES NOT have a fundamental right to eat something is, frankly, scary to me.


----------



## haypoint

More raw milk sickening people:

Thu 11 May 2012
Source: California Department of Food and Agriculture [edited] <http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/egov/Press_Releases/Press_Release.asp?PRnum=12-018>


Raw milk, raw skim milk (non-fat), raw cream, and raw butter produced by Organic Pastures Dairy of Fresno County is the subject of a statewide recall and quarantine order announced by California State Veterinarian Dr Annette Whiteford. The quarantine order came following the confirmed detection of _Campylobacter_ bacteria in raw cream.
Consumers are strongly urged to dispose of any Organic Pastures products of these types remaining in their refrigerators, and retailers are to pull those products immediately from their shelves.

From January through April 2012, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) reports that at least 10 people with campylobacteriosis were identified throughout California and reported consuming Organic Pastures raw milk prior to illness onset. Their median age is 11.5 years, with 6 under 18. The age range is 9 months to 38 years. They are residents of Fresno, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Clara counties. None of the patients have been hospitalized, and there have been no deaths.

According to CDPH, symptoms of campylobacteriosis include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever. Most people with campylobacteriosis recover completely. Illness usually occurs 2 to 5 days after exposure and lasts about a week. The illness is usually mild and some people with campylobacteriosis have no symptoms at all. However, in some persons with compromised immune systems, it can cause a serious, life-threatening infection. A small percentage of people may have joint pain and swelling after infection. In addition, a rare disease called Guillain-Barre syndrome that causes weakness and paralysis can occur several weeks after the initial illness.


----------



## haypoint

Just another update on another new set of cases. Since the cows are being tested for _Salmonella_, it is probable that the cases, number unstated, are of salmonellosis. Classical zoonotic organisms such as _Brucella abortus_, _Brucella melitensis_,_Mycobacterium bovis_, _Salmonella_ species, _Listeria monocytogenes_, _Campylobacter_ species, _Yersinia_ species, _Coxiella burnetii_, and _E. coli_ O157:H7 are associated with raw milk ingestion. Non-zoonotic organisms such as _Streptococcus pyogenes_, _Salmonella_ Typhi, _Corynebacterium diphtheriae_, _Shigella_ species, _Salmonella_ Paratyphi A, _Salmonella_ Paratyphi B, enterotoxins from _Staphylococcus aureus_, and hepatitis A have also been associated with raw milk ingestion.
Enjoy:

Wed 13 Dec 2012 Food Safety News 
<http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/12/pennsylvania-testing-cows-for-salmonella-over-raw-milk-illnesses/#.UMy98M1_wno>


Raw milk caused an undetermined number of illnesses before being removed from 
store shelves last weekend in southeast Pennsylvania.
Those sickened suffered from severe gastrointestinal symptoms after drinking raw 
milk. The cows thought to be responsible for those illnesses are being tested 
for _Salmonella_ by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture. Samantha Elliott 
Krepps, the department's press secretary, told Food Safety News that the test 
results are not yet available.

Dutch Meadows Dairy at Paradise, Pennsylvania, and Camphill Village Kimberton 
Hills Dairy at Kimberton, Pennsylvania, both had their raw milk pulled from 
store shelves. Retail sales of raw milk are legal in Pennsylvania, with 
regulatory responsibilities split between local or regional health departments 
and the state Department of Agriculture.
The 2 dairies were persuaded to pull their raw milk dairy products by the 
Chester County Health Department after several people became ill after drinking 
it. The department has not provided any further information.

According to Kimberton Whole Foods, a 4-store local chain, Dutch Meadows was 
planning to resume sales this week, while Camphill Kimberton will not be found 
back on store shelves until 5 Jan 2013.

In a notice posted on its website, the retailer said Camphill Kimberton is 
having its milk tested for _Salmonella_.

Dutch Meadows produces certified organic raw milk from Dutch-belted cows, a 
heritage breed. Camphill Village Kimberton is a 210-acre dairy farm with about 
90 Brown Swiss and Milking Short Horn cows. Its raw milk is used by the nearby 
Steven Stars Farm to produce yogurt.

The 2 dairy farms are about 160 miles apart on opposite sides of Harrisburg. The 
area allows dairy cows to feed on diverse pastures from April to November. The 4 
Kimberton Whole Foods stores are located in the Pennsylvania towns of Kimberton, 
Douglassville, Downingtown and Ottsville


----------



## haypoint

I figured the folks, many on this site, really believed the labels. That even when there was no test that could show BGH in milk, they would pay extra for milk that had a label saying that they didn't give their cows BGH.
People pay more for organic apples when regular apples contain no pesticides.


----------



## Wags

Resurrecting an old thread just you can beat a dead horse. Yeah that really convinces me to give up my freedom to choose - NOT!


----------



## haypoint

Wags said:


> Resurrecting an old thread just you can beat a dead horse. Yeah that really convinces me to give up my freedom to choose - NOT!


This is a current outbreak, just happened. December 13, 2012.

Out of respect for you and others that don't want to deal with the facts, I didn't start a new thread. The title still fits, just this is a new set of folks sickened by raw milk.

I don't want to take your freedom to choose. i just hope that you become educated about what goes on beyond your driveway and can make an educated choice. But, please don't read it if such knowledge upsets you or your beliefs.

You didn't get caught up in that Organic milk scam did you? http://www.organicmilkmarketingsettl.../Home/CaseDocs


----------



## Wags

Wow - condescending much? 

Insulting people under the guise of trying to "help" them - yeah that wins 'em over every time. Not!


----------



## arabian knight

haypoint said:


> I figured the folks, many on this site, really believed the labels. That even when there was no test that could show BGH in milk, they would pay extra for milk that had a label saying that they didn't give their cows BGH.
> People pay more for organic apples when regular apples contain no pesticides.


Yes there are plenty of scams that can't wait to prey on the uneducated, hyped up consumer that only reads the trades on organics, or things to make the earth green.
This free trade items is one of the biggest scam yet. Free Trade and Organic is so much bs it is laughable.


----------



## haypoint

Wags said:


> Wow - condescending much?
> 
> Insulting people under the guise of trying to "help" them - yeah that wins 'em over every time. Not!


Just returning the "tone". Have a good day.:duel:


----------



## mnn2501

Ambereyes said:


> just like any other food product you must take precautions with cleanliness and the health of the animals.


This is the whole key, follow the above and you won't have a problem, don't follow it and you're in for trouble.


----------



## haypoint

mnn2501 said:


> This is the whole key, follow the above and you won't have a problem, don't follow it and you're in for trouble.


That is a good general rule. However, there are a few "bugs" cattle get that you might not notice a change in their health. Campylobactor comes to mind but there are others. Gets into the milk and can cause serious health problems.
In this latest case, I think there must have been a cleanliness problem.


----------



## haypoint

Wags said:


> Resurrecting an old thread just you can beat a dead horse. Yeah that really convinces me to give up my freedom to choose - NOT!


How interesting. I just noticed where you live. Your Willamette Valley supplies the majority of U.S. sugar beet seeds and the majority of those are now *âRoundup Readyâ sugar beets*.
How ironic that a person that wants the freedom to choose raw milk, in a state where it is already legal and has a few Community of Public Health recalls of tainted milk, lives in a nest of GMO Sugar Beet seed.:smack
I don't care who you are that's funny.:clap:


----------



## gone-a-milkin

Haypoint, 

I appreciate you keeping us up to date on the outbreaks.
Maybe just because I work in dairy? :shrug:

I always read what you post on this topic.


----------



## haypoint

gone-a-milkin said:


> Haypoint,
> 
> I appreciate you keeping us up to date on the outbreaks.
> Maybe just because I work in dairy? :shrug:
> 
> I always read what you post on this topic.


Thank you. I've gotten a few PM from folks that like to keep informed, too. 
I really do try to help and I have tried to shelter folks from hearing what goes against what they want to believe. The title of the Original Post is clear. When I get new info, I add it to this single thread, so no one feels I'm plastering the site with propaganda.
"Well, I never heard about anyone getting sick from drinking raw milk." is no longer an excuse.
Thanks again.


----------



## Trixie

This isn't mean to imply I don't believe there isn't, or can't be, a danger in raw milk.

I'm just wondering, though, how do we know the 'store bought' milk is any better? How many get sick from it each year but because it isn't raw milk, and is 'sanctioned', it is attributed to something else or some new 'itis'. How do we know it isn't kept quite for financial reasons? Do we know the long term effect of the hormones and antibiotics in our milk? Would the government - read that medical industry - tell us if they knew?

I wonder why it isn't OK for someone to choose organic over non organic. Are they getting duped - sometimes - maybe. Isn't that their own choice and why should they be denigrated - called ignorant - if that is their choice? 

When people want to purchase organic, non GMO, etc., etc., that's their choice - if they can afford it - fine. When they want to know what is in their food, what's wrong with that?

It seems these kinds of things always bring out some who never met a chemical or corporation they didn't like and feel the need to defend it by insulting those who don't have quite the same warm fuzzy feeling. It makes me wondering why anyone thinks these things need so much defending. 

Also, what does someone living in the midst of 'roundup ready' sugar beets have to do with one wanting to purchase raw milk? I guess I missed something there.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

Personally I believe it is perfectly fine for people to make their own choices about their food.
I believe haypoint feels the same way. 
It is not necessary to CONDEMN people who make choices different from your own.

Trixie, in your post you mention that commercial milk has hormones and antibiotics in it. 
That is an uneducated statement to make from my perspective. 
Even though BGH has not been proven to have adverse effects in studies all the farmers in the biggest co-ops in the US have stopped using it a long time ago.
That move ended up taking out some of the smaller dairies who couldnt compete too. (beside the point)

Also, milk with antibiotics in it is a huge no-no. 
The milk plants test every truckload of milk.
The milk truck driver takes a sample from every milk tank at each stop.
They wont pay the farmers for their milk if it has antibiotics in it.

We call that "hot milk in the bulk tank" and a farmer would rather dump that whole tank out on the ground than have it go into the truck.

I have boots-on-the-ground experience there. 
The new milk truck driver is named Larry, BTW.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

Another way to look at the antibiotics issue is that cheese is made using bacteria.
If the milk has antibiotics in it you cannot use it to make cheese because of what antibiotics do.


I like to be educated about my food too.
I also happen to adore the dairy farmers that I have known so I feel like sticking up for them when I see misinformation being spread.
I think this is a safe thread for me to do this on, since it is clearly labelled as an 'enter at your own risk' topic.


----------



## Trixie

gone-a-milkin said:


> Personally I believe it is perfectly fine for people to make their own choices about their food.
> I believe haypoint feels the same way.
> It is not necessary to CONDEMN people who make choices different from your own.
> 
> Trixie, in your post you mention that commercial milk has hormones and antibiotics in it.
> That is an uneducated statement to make from my perspective.
> Even though BGH has not been proven to have adverse effects in studies all the farmers in the biggest co-ops in the US have stopped using it a long time ago.
> That move ended up taking out some of the smaller dairies who couldnt compete too. (beside the point)
> 
> Also, milk with antibiotics in it is a huge no-no.
> The milk plants test every truckload of milk.
> The milk truck driver takes a sample from every milk tank at each stop.
> They wont pay the farmers for their milk if it has antibiotics in it.
> 
> We call that "hot milk in the bulk tank" and a farmer would rather dump that whole tank out on the ground than have it go into the truck.
> 
> I have boots-on-the-ground experience there.
> The new milk truck driver is named Larry, BTW.


I wasn't speaking to anyone in particular, but it just seems if someone or a group purchase organic, and prefer no GMO and would like to have their food labelled - they suddenly are pounced upon as being uneducated, ridiculous, unAmerican, even. 

Yes, I think saying people are stupid, uneducated, and that they are simply being duped, because of their food choices could pretty much be considered condemnation. Sure sounds like it to me.

It always happens, you can count on some being very, very strong in their support of corporations and chemicals and it seems they feel these things are threatened if someone would like the choice of not ingesting them. Why do they need so much defense? What is it about these huge corporation that can't stand any questioning?

As to the milk, I don't know how to answer someone who tells me there is no hormones or antibiotics in milk, when actually even our media - read that government/medical community has admitted they are there. They just contend it is 'move along, nothing to see, all's right with the world - 'its for your own good and you stupid if you think otherwise.'

As for dairy farmers, I know some too. Some very nice people - some are not so nice. What I do know also is that much of our milk, like most everything else, comes from large corporate argibusiness. Sorry that I believe with all my heart, they know ways to get a tank of 'hot milk' to the processing plant.

But calling me uneducated didn't answer the question of how many people get ill from drinking 'sanctioned' milk? Because it is sanctioned, how many doctors would even look for it in milk - unless it was a huge outbreak. Even that could be blamed on something else. How many whether the milk is with/without hormones/antibiotics, etc.?

So how many? We don't know - we seem to assume because the news media doesn't tell us about it, it didn't happen. That is a very, very dangerous mindset.

I'll have to think on the cheese thing because while it sounds good, we have to admit to ourselves antibiotic milk has made it to the marketplace and it isn't too hard to imagine it made it to the cheesemaking place. Since I don't know the actual process (commercial) or milk used to make cheese, I won't argue that.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

I suppose there are lots of possible websites to google for numbers on milkborne illnesses from pasteurized homogonized milk.
If you find them I will read them, too. 

Actually, I believe haypoint did a thread like that one time. 
I dont mean to condemn anyone at all with my perceptions about milk.

In fact if you read my earlier posts on this very thread, I think I have made it clear that I consume raw dairy products and have for over 40 years.
Raised my kids on it and had one son whose chipped tooth spontaneously reenamelled itself.
The dentist had only "read about" that happening and had never seen it IRL. I credit that to good whole milk consumption. 

So I dont mean to condemn anyone.
There seems to be this stigma against farming in our country though.
Lots of different agendas to read between the lines.


Honestly, I do NOT trust the MEDIA for the truth.


----------



## Trixie

gone-a-milkin said:


> I suppose there are lots of possible websites to google for numbers on milkborne illnesses from pasteurized homogonized milk.
> If you find them I will read them, too.
> 
> Actually, I believe haypoint did a thread like that one time.
> I dont mean to condemn anyone at all with my perceptions about milk.
> 
> In fact if you read my earlier posts on this very thread, I think I have made it clear that I consume raw dairy products and have for over 40 years.
> Raised my kids on it and had one son whose chipped tooth spontaneously reenamelled itself.
> The dentist had only "read about" that happening and had never seen it IRL. I credit that to good whole milk consumption.
> 
> So I dont mean to condemn anyone.
> There seems to be this stigma against farming in our country though.
> Lots of different agendas to read between the lines.
> 
> 
> Honestly, I do NOT trust the MEDIA for the truth.


Sorry, if I reacted too strongly.

Usually my problem with agriculture is the knowledge most of our food is produced by factory farms and they can manage to get a lot of bad things into the food system. At the same time, they can keep a lot of bad things from being known.

As far as the media/our government/medical industry telling us the truth, if illnesses were caused by milk, I don't think we can count on that happening.

There was a time I always stood up for the farmer, but not so much any more, because of the influence of big corporations on our food production. I don't know that I would call it a stigma, just questions and maybe some distrust. I think that distrust has been earned.

I don't fault people who buy the products put out by these corporations, I do right now as we aren't in a position to do otherwise, for the most part. I just don't understand why questions about the products are usually met with the manner of disagreement they are.


----------



## arabian knight

gone-a-milkin said:


> I suppose there are lots of possible websites to google for numbers on milkborne illnesses from pasteurized homogonized milk.
> If you find them I will read them, too.
> 
> Actually, I believe haypoint did a thread like that one time.
> I dont mean to condemn anyone at all with my perceptions about milk.
> 
> In fact if you read my earlier posts on this very thread, I think I have made it clear that I consume raw dairy products and have for over 40 years.
> Raised my kids on it and had one son whose chipped tooth spontaneously reenamelled itself.
> The dentist had only "read about" that happening and had never seen it IRL. I credit that to good whole milk consumption.
> 
> So I dont mean to condemn anyone.
> There seems to be this stigma against farming in our country though.
> Lots of different agendas to read between the lines.
> 
> 
> Honestly, I do NOT trust the MEDIA for the truth.


ANd some just think that huge farms are the direst thing to come along in years. ANd that is Far Far from the truth.
Why some of the huge farms I have been in have been the cleanest I have seen in years. Ands the BioSecurity they HAVE to do now days is Far Beyond what some people think is going on.
Even the vet when he has to come HAS to CHANGE CLOTHES before entering and again on leaving.
They have to keep the animals at the best of health as the cows that are healthy produce the most milk.
These online videos that some of these anti mega farms people seem to think is the norm is FAR FAR from the norm.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJRy82i8e5Q"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJRy82i8e5Q[/ame]


----------



## haypoint

Trixie said:


> Sorry, if I reacted too strongly.
> 
> Usually my problem with agriculture is the knowledge most of our food is produced by factory farms and they can manage to get a lot of bad things into the food system. At the same time, they can keep a lot of bad things from being known.
> 
> As far as the media/our government/medical industry telling us the truth, if illnesses were caused by milk, I don't think we can count on that happening.
> 
> There was a time I always stood up for the farmer, but not so much any more, because of the influence of big corporations on our food production. I don't know that I would call it a stigma, just questions and maybe some distrust. I think that distrust has been earned.
> 
> I don't fault people who buy the products put out by these corporations, I do right now as we aren't in a position to do otherwise, for the most part. I just don't understand why questions about the products are usually met with the manner of disagreement they are.


 
So when 20 people from different cities get sick, test positive for specific type of Salmonella, each person ate a variety of things, but the common link is that each one drank raw milk from the same farm. Then when the raw milk from that farm is found in the store and a Lab cultures that milk and it shows high levels of Salmonella and the Local Health Department goes out to that farm and finds high levels of Salmonella in their bulk tank, you think it might not be real?
Thanks for wondering about âstore boughtâ milk. Pasteurized milk is tested every day. If a bunch of people reported getting sick, the local Health Department would be checking it out just as they do for any event like this, including raw milk. The Milk Industry isnât interested in âkeeping quietâ, they are devoted to insuring that milk doesnât lose its reputation as being pure. Millions of gallons of milk are sold and consumed. When there is a problem, it makes National News. I think there was a case a couple years ago where some âstore boughtâ milk was contaminated. Somehow it didnât get fully pasteurized. But that is a rare event.
But if you donât trust the farmer, donât trust the trucker, donât trust the Processing Plant, donât trust their inspectors, donât trust their Lab, donât trust USDA Inspectors, donât trust the Federal Lab, donât trust the local Health Department and believe that somehow these thousands of people are working in concert to feed you tainted âstore boughtâ milk, I just donât know what to say. 
By the way, there are hormones in raw milk. There are hormones in Organic milk, too. Has been in all milk since the dawn of time. It is there naturally and as has been explained recently, few farmers add hormones to their cows. 
It is OK for folks to be able to choose between Organic and non-Organic. I believe they are being duped. If a bag of apples that have no pesticides in them or on them sell for $5.00 a bag and a bag of apples that have no pesticides in them and never had any on them, are certified Organic and sell for $8.00 I think people are being duped. However I support their right to be able to choose.
If you bought a bag of grapes from Mexico and were eating them without washing them and you said washing takes away all the vitamins, I will think you are misinformed or under-informed. You may find that denigrating. In the same manner, if you want to buy milk from who knows where and drink it right out of the bulk tank, because you believe it has more vitamins and is healthier, I will again think you are misinformed or under-informed. I donât take away your choice to drink raw milk. I donât even take away your choice to sell raw milk. In many states laws are in place preventing the sale of raw milk, to protect the public health. 
Iâm hopeful people will want to know what is in their food. I am hopeful they will care enough to search out the answers, sort out the BS. Education is a good thing. Do you know that most raw milk isnât Organic and most Organic milk isnât raw? Do you know that all Organic is non-GMO. Do you know that there are no GMO wheat or Spelt varieties? Do you know if Frito-Lay uses GMO corn in their corn chips?
My earlier comment on Williment Valley or some such place was because I thought of the irony. Seems the same folks that are pro-raw milk are also anti-GMO. Basically against all forms of Modern Ag. So, for a person to have strong feeling about raw milk, while surrounded by thousands of acres of GMO crops, grown for seed to provide the world with more GMO crops, was amusing to me.

I do not trust chemicals or the industry that produces them. So I study. I learn. I sort out the BS. When Monsanto sued the Canadian Canola farmer, I studied the facts, not from some left wing liberal blog. Actual court transcripts. Pages and pages. Now I know it didnât âjust happenâ He had Monsantoâs seed, he signed papers that he wouldnât use it to plant seed. He planted the crop and he sold seed. Hundreds of acres. He didnât lose in court because Monsanto is evil. He lost because he was a crook. But some see him as a poster boy for freedom. BS.
I wish the world were like the movies showed the 1950s or 1850s. But it isnât. and It isnât going to be, either. Lassie isnât waiting at the end of the drive for pa to get home from getting some corn shelled. But some people want to believe it. They create lies and hide from the knowledge. So when I try to expose day to day facts, they make me the monster, and discredit me.


----------



## Ken Scharabok

I wonder why groups like the Amish and Mennonites aren't dropping in droves.


----------



## sammyd

they buy their milk at Aldi's


----------



## mamaof3peas

not the ones i know


----------



## haypoint

So, if you don't have any proof that Amish get sick from drinking tainted Ecoli milk, then it has never happened? Even if you could access a national database that showed all the reported cases of people that got sick from raw milk, would Amish be included? Do Amish tend to report such things to the Local Health Department? Does the average person have the same tollerence to Ecoli that the average Amish dairy farmer does?

I think this latest report was an amish dairy with contaminated raw milk. Wasn't too long ago that another amish dairy was shut down and their equipment taken, because of repeated violations that included contaminated milk and milk products.

I think selling raw milk in a state that doesn't allow it makes for safer milk. You hardly ever hear reports of illnesses from illegally sold raw milk. In states where it is legal to sell. there are more reports.

In most cases, by the time that it gets reported, the milk has been consumed and the store has a whole new batch of milk and the dairy has a whole new tank of milk. Lots of suspected cases go unresolved and raw milk isn't proven to be the cause.


----------



## Happy Hogger

I'd like to weigh in here. For those farmers who sell raw milk from "herd shares", I believe they are very consciencious and practice clean procedures and maintain excellent herd health. Maybe some don't. I do not sell herd shares (yet), but am toying with the idea next year. I have goats.

Regarding e-coli specifically, e-coli is everywhere. I read in this thread what was quoted back in May from some health authority in Oregon that all milk is e-coli infested (or something like that). That is SO wrong. When a doe (or cow) has e-coli mastitis, the animal is very sick and it is immediate! That half (or quarter) is very hot and produces little milk and again, it is immediate! I know because I had a doe come down with it. It was my fault as I sent her in with a buck to be bred right after milking and there was not sufficient time for the teat canal to close. He mounted her, it was raining and very muddy, and the weight of him pushed her down. Thus the infection. Her milk was dumped, she was tested by a lab and treated appropriately.

I understand those that have concerns regarding raw milk and I understand those that want to purchase raw milk. My biggest beef with Big Ag is the "ultra" pasteurization. Why does it need to be "ultra" pasteurized. Heat to 161F (or is it 164F?) for 15 seconds and be done with it. If I do offer herd shares, customers will have handouts on the "dangers" of raw milk and of course, they can always pasteurize it themselves.

The biggest factors contributing to "bad" milk is herd health, cleanliness and cooling procedures. It CAN be done well on a small farm.


----------



## Maverick_mg

Ultra pasteurizing extends the shelf life of the product and is almost always used in organic milk products. They feel they should have a longer shelf then average because they will sell slower, this makes for less waste of a more expensive to produce product.


----------



## haypoint

CAMPYLOBACTERIOSIS - USAALASKA) UNPASTEURIZED MILK
Fri 15 Feb 2013
Source: Alaska Public Health Alert Network <http://www.epi.alaska.gov/phan/AKPHAN_20130215_CampyOutbreakRawMilk.pdf>


The purpose of this Health Advisory is to inform you of a recent and potentially 
ongoing outbreak of _Campylobacter_ infections that have been associated with 
consuming raw milk.

_Campylobacter_ infection is reportable by state regulations to the Alaska 
Department of Health and Social Services' Section of Epidemiology (SOE). Since 
late January 2013, 4 people with confirmed _ Campylobacter_ infection and at 
least 1 person with probable infection reported consuming raw (unpasteurized) 
milk in the few days preceding illness. One infant with close contact to a 
confirmed case-patient is also suspected of having _Campylobacter_ infection. 
All 6 reside on the Kenai Peninsula. The _Campylobacter_ isolated from the 4 
lab-confirmed cases are a match by molecular techniques (pulsed-field gel 
electrophoresis, or PFGE). This strain of _Campylobacter_ has not been 
previously identified in Alaska.

_Campylobacter_ are bacteria that can cause diarrhea (sometimes bloody), 
abdominal cramping/pain, nausea, vomiting, and fever within 2 to 5 days after 
exposure. The illness typically lasts from several days to over a week, with 
variable severity. Some people, especially young children or individuals with 
compromised immune systems, can develop severe or even life-threatening illness. 
Infrequently, _Campylobacter_ infection leads to long-term consequences. Some 
people develop arthritis, and rarely, some develop a life-threatening disease 
called Guillain-Barre syndrome that inflames the nerves of the body beginning 
several weeks after the onset of diarrhea.

Outbreaks of _Campylobacter_ are often associated with consumption of 
unpasteurized milk -- one such outbreak, traced to a Mat-Su Valley farm, 
resulted in 18 illnesses in Alaska in 2011.
In the March 2012 issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases (Langer AJ, Ayers T, 
Grass J, et al: Nonpasteurized dairy products, disease outbreaks, and state laws 
-- United States, 1993-2006. Emerg Infect Dis 2012; 18(3): 385-91 
(<http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/11-1370_article.htm>), the authors 
report on 121 foodborne outbreaks (with 4413 cases of reported
illness) caused by contaminated dairy products, and 73 (60 percent) were 
involved with unpasteurized dairy products. 65 (54 percent) involved cheese, 42 
percent made from unpasteurized milk, and 56 involved fluid milk, 82 percent 
involved unpasteurized milk. In these outbreaks, _Campylobacter_ was responsible 
for 54 percent of the outbreaks, following by _Salmonella_ spp (22 percent), 
Enterohemorrhagic _E. coli_ (13 percent), _Brucella_ spp (4 percent), _Listeria_ 
(4 percent), and _Shigella_ spp (3 percent).
Clearly, pasteurized milk can also transmit disease, and 48 outbreaks were 
reported. The source of contamination was reported in only 7 (14 percent), of 
which at least 4 resulted from post-pasteurization contamination by an infected 
food handler.


----------



## beccachow

nevermind.


----------



## kasilofhome

haypoint said:


> CAMPYLOBACTERIOSIS - USAALASKA) UNPASTEURIZED MILK
> Fri 15 Feb 2013
> Source: Alaska Public Health Alert Network <http://www.epi.alaska.gov/phan/AKPHAN_20130215_CampyOutbreakRawMilk.pdf>
> 
> 
> The purpose of this Health Advisory is to inform you of a recent and *potentially *
> ongoing outbreak of _Campylobacter_ infections that *have been associated* with
> consuming raw milk.
> 
> _Campylobacter_ infection is reportable by state regulations to the Alaska
> Department of Health and Social Services' Section of Epidemiology (SOE). Since
> late January 2013, 4 people with confirmed _ Campylobacter_ infection and at
> least*1 person with probable infection reported consuming raw (unpasteurized) *
> milk in the few days preceding illness. *One infant with close contact to a *
> *confirmed case-patient is also suspected of having _Campylobacter_ infection. *
> All 6 reside on the Kenai Peninsula. The _Campylobacter_ isolated from the 4
> lab-confirmed cases are a match by molecular techniques (pulsed-field gel
> electrophoresis, or PFGE). *This strain of _Campylobacter_ has not been *
> *previously identified in Alaska.*
> 
> _Campylobacter_ are bacteria that can cause diarrhea (sometimes bloody),
> abdominal cramping/pain, nausea, vomiting, and fever within 2 to 5 days after
> exposure. The illness typically lasts from several days to over a week, with
> variable severity. Some people, especially young children or individuals with
> compromised immune systems, can develop severe or even life-threatening illness.
> Infrequently, _Campylobacter_ infection leads to long-term consequences. Some
> people develop arthritis, and rarely, some develop a life-threatening disease
> called Guillain-Barre syndrome that inflames the nerves of the body beginning
> several weeks after the onset of diarrhea.
> 
> *Outbreaks of _Campylobacter_ are often associated with consumption of *
> *unpasteurized milk -- one such outbreak, traced to a Mat-Su Valley farm, *
> *resulted in 18 illnesses in Alaska in 2011.*
> In the March 2012 issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases (Langer AJ, Ayers T,
> Grass J, et al: Nonpasteurized dairy products, disease outbreaks, and state laws
> -- United States, 1993-2006. Emerg Infect Dis 2012; 18(3): 385-91
> (<http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/11-1370_article.htm>), the authors
> report on 121 foodborne outbreaks (with 4413 cases of reported
> illness) caused by contaminated dairy products, and 73 (60 percent) were
> involved with unpasteurized dairy products. 65 (54 percent) involved cheese, 42
> percent made from unpasteurized milk, and 56 involved fluid milk, 82 percent
> involved unpasteurized milk. In these outbreaks, _Campylobacter_ was responsible
> for 54 percent of the outbreaks, following by _Salmonella_ spp (22 percent),
> Enterohemorrhagic _E. coli_ (13 percent), _Brucella_ spp (4 percent), _Listeria_
> (4 percent), and _Shigella_ spp (3 percent).
> Clearly, pasteurized milk can also transmit disease, and 48 outbreaks were
> reported. The source of contamination was reported in only 7 (14 percent), of
> which at least 4 resulted from post-pasteurization contamination by an infected
> food handler.


 

Just wonder Just how many of the people in the Kenai -----also ate local fish that was home cared for. For some reason the Goverment is willing to make a statement linking milk to this but is failing to mention if the locals who home can and freeze local shell fish and other seafood --which has the highest KNOWN cause for this camplobacter in this state. Hush up it is money and shutting down dairy is a goal. 

Note how often vague wording is selected to push a point of view.


----------



## haypoint

kasilofhome said:


> Just wonder Just how many of the people in the Kenai -----also ate local fish that was home cared for. For some reason the Goverment is willing to make a statement linking milk to this but is failing to mention if the locals who home can and freeze local shell fish and other seafood --which has the highest KNOWN cause for this camplobacter in this state. Hush up it is money and shutting down dairy is a goal.
> 
> Note how often vague wording is selected to push a point of view.


No, raw milk is linking raw milk to campylobacter. The government is just investigating and reporting their findings. 
Not "vague wording":
*have been associated*- people drank raw milk and got sick and were tested for campylobacter. Since they drank the milk, there is no way to rule out the raw milk with a lab test. There is nothing left to sample. All they have is a âsmoking gunâ.
*potentially ongoing*- There is no way for them to know on this date if others are affected. 
pro*bable infection*- That is when they exhibit all the symptoms of the infection without going through the actual testing procedure. Like if all the children in your childâs class are sick with the flu. Your child has a fever, diarrhea, throwing up and chills. You child doesnât have the flu, he has a probable infection. 
*One infant with close contact to a confirmed case-patient is also suspected of having _Campylobacter_ infection*.- So the baby came down with the same symptoms as the mother that was tested. Unless the baby was tested, it must be suspected. Without testing it cannot be confirmed. 
*This strain of _Campylobacter_ has not been previously identified in Alaska.-* there is no hedging or dodging. This is just factual, backed up by laboratory tests. 

It is not true that shell fish is a common cause of campylobacter injestion. 
âChicken is the most common food implicated. Any raw poultryâchicken, turkey, duck, goose, game fowlâmeat and its juices may contain Campylobacter including organic and âfree-rangeâ products. Other foods include unpasteurized milk, undercooked meats such as beef, pork, lamb, and livestock offal, and *occasionally shellfish*, fresh produce, and eggs.â http://www.campylobacterblog.com/campylobacter-information/campylobacter/


http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/06/campylobacter-illnesses-tied-to-raw-milk-in-alaska/

http://www.campylobacterblog.com/campylobacter-outbreak/mat-su-valley-farm-raw-milk-linked-to-campylobacter-illnesses/
http://www.campylobacterblog.com/campylobacter-watch/south-dakota-raw-milk-with-campylobacter/
http://www.campylobacterblog.com/campylobacter-watch/organic-pastures-raw-milk-and-campylobacter/
http://www.campylobacterblog.com/campylobacter-outbreak/your-family-cow-raw-milk-campylobacter-update-now-43-ill/
:icecream:


----------



## kasilofhome

Location location location--Seafood here is higher than milk. But commercial is the highest. Since I personally know that seafood was eaten yet never mentioned it does show a bias in failing to note that IF THE GOAL WAS TO BE HONEST IN THIS CASE.


----------



## haypoint

kasilofhome said:


> Location location location--Seafood here is higher than milk. But commercial is the highest. Since I personally know that seafood was eaten yet never mentioned it does show a bias in failing to note that IF THE GOAL WAS TO BE HONEST IN THIS CASE.


I know of no reason for Department of Health and Social Services' Section of Epidemiology to lie. Do you? You know what the victims ate? How?


----------



## DJ in WA

kasilofhome said:


> Location location location--Seafood here is higher than milk. But commercial is the highest. Since I personally know that seafood was eaten yet never mentioned it does show a bias in failing to note that IF THE GOAL WAS TO BE HONEST IN THIS CASE.


Haypoint rises early each day, frantically googles "raw milk disease outbreak" and after two months he finally comes up with something, and your reasoning squelches his excitement.

Seems if haypoint wanted to keep us safe, he'd be reporting all forms of foodborne illness. Raw vegetables are killers.

I was also wondering about the wording of this report. A basic rule of statistics is that correlation does not equal causation. Each of the sick people might have had coffee that day, but that doesn't mean it caused the illness. Everyone who eats carrots will die, but that doesn't mean the carrots killed them.

You have to look beyond the sick people, and also consider those not sick. If 40 people consumed raw milk, and only 4 got sick, you probably want to look elsewhere. You might discover that those 4 people also ate seafood, and of those who ate that seafood, 12 of 15 got sick. There are fancier statistical formulas, but that's the gist of what I learned in training for disease outbreak investigations years ago.

It is also interesting the wording about the infant. Are they saying the infant was possibly infected because of close contact? So they're saying it was spread directly from another person and not through raw milk?
&#12288;
&#12288;


----------



## kasilofhome

Palmer, Alaska is located in the striking Matanuska Valley of Southcentral Alaska, between the Chugach and Talkeetna mountain ranges. Peas grow there in summer, the season when its possible to go out and watch the Sandhill Cranes that frequent the area.

*This past summer, however, 99 people came down with Campylobacter*. 
The *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)* in Atlanta determined that the outbreak of Campylobacter diarrhea was traced to eating uncooked peas that came from a field frequented by sandhill cranes.
Droppings from the cranes most likely contaminated the peas, said Dr. Tracie Gardner, an epidemiologist with the *Alaska Division of Public Health.*

*Seal meat is rather high for this too in Alaska --no that much of an issue in other locations but there really is a push to put raw milk in the limelight. So Hay you question that fish is a MAIN staple in Alaska esp in rural areas. It is canned, smoked, smoked and canned, it is dried, jerked, pickled, it raw, frozen, served with eggs, in spreads, used to teeth toddlers, and fermented in native ways. It is hard to avoid. It is the food of the poor, the weathy the local and tourist. It is hard to avoid. I personally hate it yet I canned about twenty CASES last year. Seafood is a way of life. Oh, many people still can in thier ovens --esp if they are from the Russian heritage areas of Alaska. Also many people in my town do not have running water and fish is often canned on the beach. This is what I know first hand and it is why I will wait till the studies and facts come out in this case. I firmly believe that the people had more than just milk in common.*


----------



## Hollowdweller

I don't think raw milk should be illegal.

I drink my own raw milk all the time.

However I have got sick (not deathly ill though) from drinking other peoples raw milk.

I figure I'm immune to all the stuff in mine cause I've been drinking it for 20 years. But not the strains in other peoples.

I think the reason most people want to SELL raw milk is that they don't have to invest in the things to legally sell milk otherwise.

However I think anybody buying it should be made aware of the increased risk especially to infants or adults with impaired immune systems.

The deeper question for me is if you don't have insurance and then you feed it to your kid and he gets gravely ill then medicaid picks up the cost, or the hospitals chalk it up to charity and then raise all who are insured rates to compensate for the unpaid for care.

I think that people who say that people get sick from raw veggies and other legal things are true. I'm not sure proportionally though whether those things are more likely to get you sick than raw milk, or that they are more widely bought and eaten.

Really one of the reasons for the regs is there was a public health problem related to raw milk. But we have come a long way now cleanliness wise.

So now we can experiment. Allow sales of raw milk and if it appears it starts becoming a big public health problem or people sick wind up costing the taxpayers a lot then the regs can be tightened up.

As Haypoint points out periodically we are seeing some outbreaks from raw milk so there is some evidence that relaxing the regs does increase outbreaks related to raw milk.

However at this point I'm not sure whether we know enough about the numbers of outbreaks to decide whether the risk is at or above the level of other raw foods.


----------



## haypoint

I, also, don't think raw milk should be illegal. However I don&#8217;t want it sold on the open market for lots of reasons.
I, also, have consumed my cow&#8217;s raw milk many times.
I agree that many people sell raw milk are not operating at the high standards of a commercial dairy. 
There is the added cost to the public when a person is hospitalized due to a bacteria in raw milk. That could have been avoided. But more importantly, such outbreaks undermine the public trust in safe food in general and safe milk specifically. That hurts those that are producing a safe product. 
When a thousand people eat spinach that has a splash of hot hog manure in it, many will get sick. Not all. A bunch may go to their doctor&#8217;s office, if they can get in. Others may seek attention in an Emergency Room. A few will require hospitalization. Someone at a County Health Department in several different communities may hear about it and go check in on the folks in the hospital. There is nothing to get samples from. They have consumed dozens of things over the past week and shopped in several stores and eaten in several restaurants. The chances of pinning it on a specific batch or company is slim. 
It is the same for raw milk. By the time the authorities arrive, the milk is digested and flushed. The milk is gone and there is a fresh batch in the farm&#8217;s bulk tank. It happens more often than we know. Then, there is the illegal sales that no one wants to admit breaking the law and then snitching on the provider.
When a half dozen folks report signs of e coli ingestion, and each had just one food in common, raw milk and then everyone that drank that batch of milk are questioned and they report the same symptoms, it gets investigated. Sometimes there is a &#8220;smoking gun&#8221; like a bottle still in the &#8216;fridge or a pail of undumped vomit. Well, I think you understand how bacteria is traced. 
More reported illnesses from raw veggies than raw milk. But there is 10,000 times the consumption of raw veggies. Veggies are mostly eaten fresh. Milk does not need to be. Just because I eat raw lettuce is no reason to eat raw hamburger or raw eggs. 
We have come a long ways, health wise. But our population, now far from the farm, is often more susceptible to bacterial infection. 
In states that have legalized the sale of raw milk, reported illnesses have increased. This could be for several reasons, most detailed above.
I believe that the reported outbreak does not give an accurate picture of the risks. Many raw milk related illnesses cannot be proven, because the milk is consumed and cannot be examined. Most raw milk illnesses are not reported, unless they become life threatening. Thousands of Amish drink raw milk and would not report an illness. 
But, every now and then, when a raw milk illness hits the national news, I&#8217;ll add it to this thread.


----------



## Laura

I agree the health risks are very low for us farm families consuming our raw dairy since we mostly have healthy immune systems from living and playing in farm poop, and knowing how to properly dairy. 

No way would I ever share my raw milk with city people who'd never played in the dirt. No matter what upset their tummy, they'd blame my milk. I won't partake in other people's farm products unless it's up to my standards either. I guess that makes me a Farm Snob. Whatever. I don't eat packaged, value added, chemicalized grocery store food either. It makes us sick.

The sickest any of my kids got, middle DD got MRSA playing in tidepools and climbing sea stacks on the North Pacific Coast. Seagull poop.


----------



## unregistered168043

I remember a few years ago alot of people got very sick from eating commercially grown spinach, a few even died. Where are the outcries to stop the production of spinach? Where are the calls to stop large commercial agribusiness from producing this crop? I guess 'spinach strikes again' would have made a nice thread title.


----------



## Laura

Darntootin said:


> I remember a few years ago alot of people got very sick from eating commercially grown spinach, a few even died. Where are the outcries to stop the production of spinach? Where are the calls to stop large commercial agribusiness from producing this crop? I guess 'spinach strikes again' would have made a nice thread title.


 People have no clue how incredibly contaminated irrigation water is.


----------



## haypoint

Darntootin said:


> I remember a few years ago alot of people got very sick from eating commercially grown spinach, a few even died. Where are the outcries to stop the production of spinach? Where are the calls to stop large commercial agribusiness from producing this crop? I guess 'spinach strikes again' would have made a nice thread title.


You mean where hundreds of Florida spinach farmers lost millions because the uninformed public with a knee jerk reaction refused to buy their spinach because of a California spinach field that had pig manure in it? That mess?

It may please you to know that something was done about it. They've cracked down on the use of manure in vegetable patches. Commercial fertilizers only, just to be safe. 

Not much else you can do with spinach to make it safer, milk however.......


----------



## kasilofhome

When a half dozen folks report signs of e coli ingestion, *and each had just one food in common, raw milk* and then everyone that drank that batch of milk are questioned and they report the same symptoms, it gets investigated.

I live here ---We, have many with out running water--Those that do have (which is about 80 --going high percent ) the water is not the best--many do not test the water --that is a fact. It is also a fact that the only school here pull all sources of drinking water cause of a failed to pass inspection for lots of bad stuff and only bottled water is served. It is common here in my town to have signs on water taps in the very few public buildings that state "not for consumption. In fact the people with out water wells might just fair better than those with private wells because most simple haul water from the Merc --our local coffee shop, hardware store, grocery store, feed store, vidio store (used to be the post office too) clothing store, fax center and pizza joint. The Merk is sorta our "town hall" that well is test reg and the results publically posted

Fish and seafood is really the number one food source--Hunting for moose has been so restricted that only a handfull of moose were netted. Now, add in that many here make use of gennies for ele ---it cost me 22k just to hook up to ele. This is important because food is often stored (Sourdough mentioned this too) in animal proof --or almost animal proof containers and in the winter time the great out doors is used to cut cost on the fridge to afford ele to go to heat. Then add in that we have been blessed with a mild winter with out door temp in the40's and bouncing. 

Now, the few cow shares and goat shares have been around for years. This place is mainly populated by those relateded to each others thus close knit family conection so the milk share is from Uncle joe or bother Tom or SIL mary ect. KNOWN very well to the buyer. Remember it was Just40 years that mail was delivered by dogs. People here simply do not fit what was the norm (I am from New York) that I grew up with. Outhouses are far from rare. Honestly with in a week of living in Alaska I was served a fermented fish head-- it was scary-- I found myself rather full from a sudden want for the fry bread that was there too. --How about being offered "stink eggs" personally I have passed on that too --to me it is rotten fish eggs. Really it is formally called STINK EGGS. 

I honestly think that milk was NOT the only thing they had in common and it is UNDER INVESTIGATION not a closed invetigation. But it makes the news and pushes a point of view  -- why not wait to know for sure before sentencing a source.


----------



## unregistered168043

haypoint said:


> You mean where hundreds of Florida spinach farmers lost millions because the uninformed public with a knee jerk reaction refused to buy their spinach because of a California spinach field that had pig manure in it? That mess?
> 
> It may please you to know that something was done about it. They've cracked down on the use of manure in vegetable patches. Commercial fertilizers only, just to be safe.
> 
> Not much else you can do with spinach to make it safer, milk however.......


No according to this ( below ), green leafy vegetables mostly produced by large agribusiness, account for nearly half the cases of food born diseases in this country! Where as all dairy related diseases ( the majority of consumed dairy are produced by large commercial dairies ) *combined* only accounted for 14.5%!

That means that out of 4.9 million food born diseases reported 2.1 MILLION were the fault of green leafy vegetables ( most of which are produced by large agribusiness ). While only 710, 000 of total food born illness were caused by all dairy products COMBINED. Most dairy products consumed are produced by large commercial dairies. Conclusion....large commercial production of all products, particularly green leafy vegetables are the cause of the overwhelming majority of all food born illness. That number FAR exceeding any that might be attributed to raw milk and small scale production.


Thank you for posting this topic so that we were given the opportunity to expose the dangers of large commercial agribusiness and green leafy vegetables.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/most-food-illnesses-come-from-greens/


----------



## haypoint

Darntootin said:


> No according to this ( below ), green leafy vegetables mostly produced by large agribusiness, account for nearly half the cases of food born diseases in this country! Where as all dairy related diseases ( the majority of consumed dairy are produced by large commercial dairies ) *combined* only accounted for 14.5%!
> 
> That means that out of 4.9 million food born diseases reported 2.1 MILLION were the fault of green leafy vegetables ( most of which are produced by large agribusiness ). While only 710, 000 of total food born illness were caused by all dairy products COMBINED. Most dairy products consumed are produced by large commercial dairies. Conclusion....large commercial production of all products, particularly green leafy vegetables are the cause of the overwhelming majority of all food born illness. That number FAR exceeding any that might be attributed to raw milk and small scale production.
> 
> 
> http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/most-food-illnesses-come-from-greens/


 
I am sorry if you thought I said that raw milk had more reported illnesses than spinach or any other fresh vegetable. :teehee:
But, as I closed with, "there&#8217;s not much you can do to make spinach safer." 
When we start trying to prove who is more wrong or what is less safe, we have to keep some real basic facts in mind. The fresh greens are consumed by millions each day, while the raw milk feeds a few thousand.
Last year, more people died in accidents in a Ford than died in an accident in a Yugo. Does that make the Yugo safer or is it just there are fewer on the roads. Same for Green leafy vegetables and raw milk. :nono:
Then it goes to the proof. Reports of illnesses from green leafy vegetables is more likely to effect a larger group, simply because it is sold to larger groups of people. Say a thousand people eat tainted spinach; a few hundred get sick, a dozen get hospitalized. Health Department connects a few of the hundred dots and the product is tested. Recall goes out. 
With raw milk, those buying illegal milk and the Amish will not likely report it, unless there is a near death experience. Those that buy legally and do get sick enough to report it, often don&#8217;t leave any evidence for Health Department. The few, perhaps as many as a hundred jugs of milk are gone, consumed. Even if the dairy&#8217;s bulk tank were checked, it is a different lot of milk and cannot be connected to the contaminated milk. 
It is a case where the small numbers of customers served, keeps the numbers of illnesses small and much of the evidence has been flushed one way or the other. But when the next provable illness from raw milk hits the NEWS, I&#8217;ll have it right here for you to ignore.:shrug:
There are plenty of subjects to nitpick about raw milk, I think raw greens can be its own topic.


----------



## Laura

People get sick from pasturized dairy too. It often becomes contaminated after pasturization.


----------



## Lazaryss

haypoint said:


> Nope, you can drink yourself silly on all the raw milk you want. But when you start marketing it to others, I have a big concern. Your little "cottage industry" threatens the whole milk industry. A collection of hard working farmers that have worked hard to insure that their product is safe. Since all the vitamins and minerals remain after pasteurization, what's the point?
> 
> Most consumers are not going to study up on milk borne pathogens before they buy raw milk. Likewise, an outbreak, causing hospitalization, from raw milk will cause folks to stop buying the pasteurized product. Just as Florida spinach suffered from e coli tainted California spinach.
> 
> Where raw milk is illegal, when people get sick they keep their lip buttoned. In places that allow it, reports come with some regularity.
> 
> Do think the parents of the children that lay in hospital beds, with failed livers, expected that to be the risk they were going to be taking?
> 
> The OR raw milk was sold through a herd share. I see through that shell game. They are buying milk, not buying shares. So don't play that slight of hand magic trick.
> 
> But mostly, I just want to help keep everyone aware of what is going on beyond their gate post.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/dairy-free-avoid-this-pop_b_558447.html

"First of all, please understand that I do not recommend drinking pasteurized milk of any kind -- ever. Because once milk has been pasteurized it's more or less "dead," and offers little in terms of real nutritional value to anyone, whether you show signs of intolerance to the milk or not.

Valuable enzymes are destroyed, vitamins (such as A, C, B6 and B12) are diminished, fragile milk proteins are radically transformed from health nurturing to unnatural amino acid configurations that can actually worsen your health. Finally the eradication of beneficial bacteria through the pasteurization process actually ends up promoting pathogens."


----------



## Laura

Haypoint, Cowshare is LEGAL in Oregon. It is not legal in my state.

I've seen the entire gamut of outlaw dairies, some selling milk I wouldn't feed a pig. You betcha' when people get sick they clam up to protect their source. Or they're so far into the Magic Milk Fantasy, they're too dumb to know it's the milk. An unscrupulous owner of magic cows isn't going to tell them, either.


----------



## haypoint

Laura said:


> Haypoint, Cowshare is LEGAL in Oregon. It is not legal in my state.
> 
> I've seen the entire gamut of outlaw dairies, some selling milk I wouldn't feed a pig. You betcha' when people get sick they clam up to protect their source. Or they're so far into the Magic Milk Fantasy, they're too dumb to know it's the milk. An unscrupulous owner of magic cows isn't going to tell them, either.


Yes, I understand that it is legal. In Michigan it isn't clearly illegal, so the Health Department mostly lets it slide. But, as I said in that post you mentioned, I think it is a sneak-around the existing laws. "If I can't legally buy raw milk, then I'll rent one-fourteenth of a cow, have someone else feed and milk her and collect my milk from my cow once a week and that's not buying raw milk.":whistlin:


----------



## haypoint

Lazaryss said:


> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/dairy-free-avoid-this-pop_b_558447.html
> 
> "First of all, please understand that I do not recommend drinking pasteurized milk of any kind -- ever. Because once milk has been pasteurized it's more or less "dead," and offers little in terms of real nutritional value to anyone, whether you show signs of intolerance to the milk or not.
> 
> Valuable enzymes are destroyed, vitamins (such as A, C, B6 and B12) are diminished, fragile milk proteins are radically transformed from health nurturing to unnatural amino acid configurations that can actually worsen your health. Finally the eradication of beneficial bacteria through the pasteurization process actually ends up promoting pathogens."


 
Wow, how far back did you go to dig up that old posting? Congrats!

That Huffington Post story is from Mercola. Personally, I view him as a Quack on several different topics. 
http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-specificinformation/milksafety/ucm122062.htm
7. Does pasteurization affect the nutrient content of milk?
Research shows no meaningful difference between the nutrient content of pasteurized and unpasteurized milk.
8. Does pasteurizing milk alter it in a fashion that can cause allergic reactions?
No. The milk proteins which cause allergic reactions in dairy-sensitive people are present in both raw milk and pasteurized milk.

9. Can drinking pasteurized milk cause lactose intolerance?
No. Lactose intolerance is due to an insufficient production in the body of the enzyme needed to break down lactose, beta-galactosidase. Lactose is present in both raw milk and pasteurized milk at the same concentration. Pasteurization does not impact the concentration of lactose.
10. Does raw milk kill pathogens?
No, it does not. In fact, raw milk potentially harbors a wide range of dangerous pathogens that can cause illness.


----------



## fantasymaker

I think Everyone should have the freedom to purchase Raw milk...or not to,
BUT 
All freedoms come with a price.


----------



## kasilofhome

Freedom has a price and enslavement comes with a price. Be cared what you buy---be that milk, peanuts, freedom, or enslavement--education provides a chance to make choices each person can accept.

Milk shares are to selling milk as a tax is to penalty. It gets the job done.


----------



## Warwalk

Can cheese be made from pasteurized / homogenized milk? It's my understanding that these two processes destroy the beneficial bacterium necessary for cheese making, but don't know. I've never milked a cow, nor made cheese ~ I've heard this is a big driver in raw milk production, no?


----------



## Laura

Warwalk, I pasturize before culturing so I don't have competing bacterias. It takes 6 months of aging cheese to be ompletely sure the good culture wipes out any possible bad cultures. With cheeses, you're holding the milk at warm temperature for hours at a time.

Homoginizing is a different process that breaks up the fat gobules to much to collect again. It prevents cream from rising to the top. I never tried to make cheese from it.


Haypoint, yes the enzymes are still present in pasturized milk, but just like the bacteria, it's dead and are of no benefit.


----------



## haypoint

"Haypoint, yes the enzymes are still present in pasturized milk, but just like the bacteria, it's dead and are of no benefit. "

Correction/clairification:
Enzymes: 
Lipases degrades milk fat and gives an off flavor, turned off by heat. Proteases degrades protein. Some proteases are turned off by heat, some are not. Lactoperoxidase, when combined with hydrogen peroxide and thiocyanate, has antibacterial properties. Not bothered by heat. 
http://www.milkfacts.info/Milk%20Composition/Enzymes.htm


----------



## haypoint

Milk shares are to selling milk as a white lie is to the truth. Rationalization is everything.


----------



## fantasymaker

haypoint said:


> Milk shares are to selling milk as a white lie is to the truth. Rationalization is everything.


LOL but its the governmet that is rationalizing.
If Bill gates happens to buy some cows and pay someone to milk them then feels like drinking some milk whos gonna argue?
What if he just buys one cow?
As long as the Shares require a equitable investment its as honest as anything the government gets involved in.


----------



## haypoint

http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/


----------



## Lazaryss

haypoint said:


> Wow, how far back did you go to dig up that old posting? Congrats!
> 
> That Huffington Post story is from Mercola. Personally, I view him as a Quack on several different topics.
> http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-specificinformation/milksafety/ucm122062.htm
> 7. Does pasteurization affect the nutrient content of milk?
> Research shows no meaningful difference between the nutrient content of pasteurized and unpasteurized milk.
> 8. Does pasteurizing milk alter it in a fashion that can cause allergic reactions?
> No. The milk proteins which cause allergic reactions in dairy-sensitive people are present in both raw milk and pasteurized milk.
> 
> 9. Can drinking pasteurized milk cause lactose intolerance?
> No. Lactose intolerance is due to an insufficient production in the body of the enzyme needed to break down lactose, beta-galactosidase. Lactose is present in both raw milk and pasteurized milk at the same concentration. Pasteurization does not impact the concentration of lactose.
> 10. Does raw milk kill pathogens?
> No, it does not. In fact, raw milk potentially harbors a wide range of dangerous pathogens that can cause illness.


Well, I did the first thing you probably did. I found the first story I could find that supported my viewpoint and posted it without any sort of research. Thought I would illustrate the sillyness of some of your links.

Here is a simple solution. My family and I will continue to drink raw milk, just like people did for thousands of years. You and your family continue to drink pasteurized milk, which was started in the early 1800s, at least as a "new" process then.

Is raw milk more dangerous than pasteurized milk? Absolutely! If the farm is dirtier. The opposite is true when the statement is flipped as well. Thankfully, I know exactly where my milk comes from.


----------



## Lazaryss

haypoint said:


> http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/


Could you possibly find more biased websites lol.


----------



## kasilofhome

Well, nothing yet confirmed on the Kenai milk scare. Story dropped here. Nation wide blast freaked out some provided fodder for a cause ---all on a maybe. People here scratched their head and where's the FACTS. Cow share places still up and running. I know of one goat share and her goats are dry till march and she will be up and running again. People wonder why I will not deal in milk just because of bull. I did LEGALLY -DEC approved sell eggs. but stopped because of the sale TAXES I paid were greater than my profit and the bourgh did not have to haul water for the money.


----------



## haypoint

kasilofhome said:


> Well, nothing yet confirmed on the Kenai milk scare. Story dropped here. Nation wide blast freaked out some provided fodder for a cause ---all on a maybe. People here scratched their head and where's the FACTS. Cow share places still up and running. I know of one goat share and her goats are dry till march and she will be up and running again. People wonder why I will not deal in milk just because of bull. I did LEGALLY -DEC approved sell eggs. but stopped because of the sale TAXES I paid were greater than my profit and the bourgh did not have to haul water for the money.


I think that before you call this a dead issue, you might want to drop by Kevin Byers dairy and talk to him. I'll bet he knows what the latest news is. 



âWhen they looked at these strains, they found that the four specimens were all exactly the same type, so that is consistent with a cluster of illnesses and when we found out additional information it seemed that all of the people who developed the infection had consumed raw milk or unpasteurized milk in the proceeding several days before they got sick,â Yablon said.

The state is still working to identify the source of the raw milk. A farmer named Kevin Byers in Kasilof distributes raw milk to families around the state. He did not agree to a recorded interview, but said he doesnât know if his milk is responsible for the outbreak. He says his customers drink his milk for the perceived health benefits. According to a recent newspaper article, Byers has 150 customers as far away as Sitka.

http://www.alaskapublic.org/2013/02/15/campylobacter-outbreak-linked-to-raw-milk-on-the-kenai-peninsula/


How many illnesses?

To date, a total of 18 individuals have been identified in this outbreak. Some of these individuals have had recurrent illness. Two required hospitalization. SOE is planning to contact individuals suspected of receiving or consuming raw milk from the involved farm, and it is expected that the number of probable and confirmed cases will rise.

What is the source of this outbreak?

All probable and confirmed cases have been linked to consumption of raw milk from a farm on the Kenai Peninsula that operates a cow-share program. The milk is distributed to shareholders throughout the Kenai Peninsula, in Anchorage, and in Sitka. There is at least one secondary case of an infant who became ill after having close contact with a laboratory-confirmed case.
http://www.foodpoisonjournal.com/foodborne-illness-outbreaks/alaska-raw-milk-cow-share-campylobacter-outbreak-now-18/
This was written by Patty Waller, an Epidemiologist that works with a Law Firm that deals with food poisonings.


----------



## kasilofhome

haypoint said:


> I think that before you call this a dead issue, you might want to drop by Kevin Byers dairy and talk to him. I'll bet he knows what the latest news is.
> 
> 
> 
> âWhen they looked at these strains, they found that the four specimens were all exactly the same type, so that is consistent with a cluster of illnesses and when we found out additional information it seemed that all of the people who developed the infection had consumed raw milk or unpasteurized milk in the proceeding several days before they got sick,â Yablon said.
> 
> The state is still working to identify the source of the raw milk. A farmer named Kevin Byers in Kasilof distributes raw milk to families around the state. He did not agree to a recorded interview, but said he doesnât know if his milk is responsible for the outbreak. He says his customers drink his milk for the perceived health benefits. According to a recent newspaper article, Byers has 150 customers as far away as Sitka.
> 
> http://www.alaskapublic.org/2013/02/15/campylobacter-outbreak-linked-to-raw-milk-on-the-kenai-peninsula/
> 
> 
> How many illnesses?
> 
> To date, a total of 18 individuals have been identified in this outbreak. Some of these individuals have had recurrent illness. Two required hospitalization. SOE is planning to contact individuals suspected of receiving or consuming raw milk from the involved farm, and it is expected that the number of probable and confirmed cases will rise.
> 
> What is the source of this outbreak?
> 
> All probable and confirmed cases have been linked to consumption of raw milk from a farm on the Kenai Peninsula that operates a cow-share program. The milk is distributed to shareholders throughout the Kenai Peninsula, in Anchorage, and in Sitka. There is at least one secondary case of an infant who became ill after having close contact with a laboratory-confirmed case.
> http://www.foodpoisonjournal.com/foodborne-illness-outbreaks/alaska-raw-milk-cow-share-campylobacter-outbreak-now-18/
> This was written by Patty Waller, an Epidemiologist that works with a Law Firm that deals with food poisonings.


 
Yep, he is in the cow share program--He delivers hay to me. He is out there--so what would be the odds that he has been tested and they STILL DO NOT KNOW THE SOURCE.


----------



## kasilofhome

So, what if it is that NO milk source will test dirty for it, will the just keep searching for bad milk or open their eyes to FISH. Why not check out other things they have in common.................;FISH--HOME CANNED.


----------



## haypoint

So you are sure that 18 people, all that drank milk from Kevin's dairy, that live in a wide area, also ate from a jar of home canned tainted shell fish? Amazing!
Please keep us updated.


----------



## kasilofhome

Do YOU know if the state found ANYTHING to shut Kevin down? Would the state slam the door shut if they found anything? 


Do you have a clue how many use Kevin's cow share? It certainly is ODD that the state has gone quiet on this. If you check the copy which was a rewrite of a local paper well over a week ago. What you posted today was the first written report nothing new-- simply new papers rehashing the orginal report why...........CAUSE There is nothing new----NOTHING FOUND.....
Ground zero has not been found YET over 3 weeks. It was and is more than likely a witch hunt. Kevin was out in the open---newpaper artical publicaly stating his openning--I guess he was too bold for the inspectors. 

Hay---You do NOT have a clue as to the amount of canned seafood. Sorry but it is as common as having food in a fridge. I HATE salmon I can't avoid being exposed to it at every gathering. At a potluck (we have cut back but we once went to 3 a week) It is on a plater dried, in a creamcheese ball, on to the salmon chowder, and salmon and white lasagna. I am waiting for them to come up with a drink with salmon and a dessert. It is even flaked in the salads. Salmon is cheap. Oh, many reuse the lids and they are not tattlers.---When it comes to michigan you know more than I but come on This is about my little bitty community of a few hundred people last count 777 and many of who I have meet at a potluck over time. So, I am waiting for them to call a ground zero before I dance on the grave of Kevin wonderful, loved cow share. Where in the rehashed story did you see that kevin was the source. Oh the other big place I know them too but thus far CM has not be dragged thur the mud and it is bad enough that Kevin has.


----------



## kasilofhome

Why do I know so much cause I wanted to know what I could eat so I asked many how to can and learned how they did it and if they kinds offered to teach me methods that kinds scared me well I learned to pass on what they brought to the potluck.. Ok I know it is odd but please just try to understand that this life style is not what I grew up this and honestly some of it scared or freaked me out. Now, I am used to it and accept it but I am sure glad to know the family that oven can's with reused lids to warn my family --


----------



## Lazaryss

Here is a simple solution Haypoint. My family and I will continue to drink raw milk, just like people did for thousands of years. You and your family continue to drink pasteurized milk, which was started in the early 1800s, at least as a "new" process then.

Is raw milk more dangerous than pasteurized milk? Absolutely! If the farm is dirtier. The opposite is true when the statement is flipped as well. Thankfully, I know exactly where my milk comes from.


----------



## kasilofhome

Show something that proves that Kev's milk was the source. Show that there is a test that his place tested positive for this. So, far ASSUMPTIONS and with that you wish to condeme him and his livelyhood. I say that before we hang him we get the facts. Is that wrong to do when raw milk is involed?


----------



## haypoint

I'm not against you drinking your cow's milk raw. I am posting the reported cases where sold raw milk made a group of people sick. I did not assume Kevin Byers was the source of this outbreak. But someone that was closer to the case than you or I talked to him.
Nice guys and healthy looking cows sometimes produce milk that contains enough bacteria to make people sick.
You and I may never know if Kevin Byers cleaned his bulk tank after selling that last bunch of bottled milk and the bacteria that is suspected in sickening 18 people is no longer in his bulk tank. 
Because "milk shares" is designed to avoid the laws against the sale of raw milk, these 18 people were sickened on their own milk, from their own cow. If that baby were to die, they cannot blame Kevin Byers. He was just milking their cow for them. Right? How much effort should the Alaskain Public Health put into a food product that never entered the public market?
But if they find that never-before-seen strain of campylobactor at Kevin's farm, should I expect it was because someone tipped over a can of tuna in his milkhouse after this investigation started?
If the national interests wains, be sure to keep us informed as this evolves.


----------



## kasilofhome

Hay--YOU ARE NOT POSTING FACTS.

The facts are people got sick.
The type of illness in confirmed. fact
YOU posted kev's name
IF the Baby gets sick enough and DIES and IF the baby death was cause by the illness it would be best to find the REAL source not go on a WITCH HUNT

Really do you think the Sandhill CRANES pooping on PEAS would have impact 18 people with a similar illness in ALASKA --BUT it was proven.

HOW about if you impact KEV's income and it is proven at some time (so far he has been found clean) that the source ends up being COMFIRMED some Other source and Kev's suffere harm I will point him to this story and assist him in finding out what legal action he can take. HE IS OPEN AND LEGAL-- He is not above the law he refuses to talk----smarted thing any one can do--while the constutions is still valid.

BULLYING and smearing and impacting a persons life to push an agenda is sick. You could not wait for the facts --you mislead people and you have your mind made up with out facts (TUNA DUMPING). Own up to smearing the man with out facts.
FACT kev LEGALLY SOLD SHARES IN HIS HERD
FACT PEOPLE WILLING BOUGHT SHARES


----------



## Laura

Cow Shares are not a clandestine end runs on milk laws. They are specifically legal. You keep harping but fail to grasp Cow Share is written law in the states that have it.

Another thing you fail to grasp is harmful bacteria is found everywhere in our environment. That's why we don't lick the bottom of our shoes and why we discourage our babies from licking them too. Some people have better immune systems than others, and some people have better sanitation pratices. Some people are serious germ spreaders.

Out here in the extreme rural parts of the west, it is common for groups of people, some living 100 miles or more apart, to have many common food sources, not just dairy. It is common for these groups to be socially connected on many levels too. 

You do learn fast whose crockpot you don't want to eat roadkill from and which family never washes their hands


----------



## kasilofhome

haypoint said:


> I am posting the reported cases where sold raw milk made a group of people sick. Thus far NO SOURCE HAS BEEN FOUND THUS THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS FALSE. I did not assume Kevin Byers was the source of this outbreak. But someone that was closer to the case than you or I talked to him. KEVIN REFUSED TO TALK--smart move prevent twisting of words--even not commenting you seem to assumed THE DIALOG.
> 
> 
> should I expect it was because someone tipped over a can of tuna in his milkhouse after this investigation started?you so want to have this be raw milk that you close your eyes --great science move.
> .


 
Allowing one to twist the facts for the sake of getting along or out of fear will only allow bullying to be the method of control of society.


----------



## haypoint

kasilofhome said:


> Allowing one to twist the facts for the sake of getting along or out of fear will only allow bullying to be the method of control of society.


 In the local news story, the author wrote (and I posted)â A farmer named Kevin Byers in Kasilof distributes raw milk to families around the state. He did not agree to a recorded interview, but *said* he doesnât know if his milk is responsible for the outbreak. He says his customers drink his milk for the perceived health benefits.â
He talked, but he refused to be recorded. I posted what was printed in the public article. If you donât want to have the facts twisted, you get it recorded. If you donât want to admit to anything that could later be used against you, you refuse to be recorded, so you can deny it later, if need be. 
He doesn't know if it was his milk was responsible. Is that because they didn't test his facility or is it because the Lab results aren't back.
In Michigan there are no laws permitting raw milk herd shares. But the state chooses to ignore it. I was unaware that states openly permit it. I thought that it was either legal to sell raw milk or illegal. I canât legally sell meat, but I can sell you a hog and take it to the butcher shop for you. 
If I had to choose between legalizing the sale of raw milk and herd shares, Iâd choose herd shares. That keeps the blame off the public food supply. 
All any of us have, at this point is speculation. If I had a map with a dot showing where each sick person lived and another dot that showed where Byers milk shares folks lived. It would make a better case for the source being from raw milk. If a scientist could explain if that strain of campylobacter could exist in shellfish. If they swabbed Byersâ milk house and found that same specific identifier that they found in the sick folks, that would shore up the argument that it was raw milk. I donât know if they swabbed his bulk tank, swabbed his milk house or if they are just waiting for Lab results. I donât know if it is important to them to prove anything. There are lots of food poisoning cases that go unsolved. 
If you and I set up a stand in your beautiful downtown, you selling canned clams and me selling raw milk. Iâll guess, some might buy from you, some buy from me and a few buy from bofus. I sold 50 bottles and you sold 50 jars.
A week later, 18 people report the back door trots. Every one of them bought milk from me. Everyone had a single specific strain of campylobacter. If half of them bought from both, and half just bought from me, my milk would be suspect. Right? But then when the Health Department went poking around asking questions, 30 homes that bought milk from me, had people there that remember being sick last week. But only 5 places that only bought your canned clams stated they got sick. Kevin Byers milk is still only suspected as the source. It seems logically clear it was his milk, there is the âsmoking gunâ, but no proof it was his bullet.


----------



## kasilofhome

Home
Local 
At the Movies
Dining Guide
Downloads
Neighbor To Neighbor
Phat To Fit
Think About It
What's Happening 
Submit Event


News 
KSRM Web Links

Sports 
Current Sports Headlines
High School Sports Schedules
Information Links
Sports Bulletin Board
Weekly Sports Schedule

Dog Gone News 
Submit a Report

About 
Staff

Birthdays
Marketing
Radio Stations 
KFSE 106.9FM 
KFSE SCHEDULE

KKIS 96.5FM 
KKIS SCHEDULE

KSLD 1140AM 
KSLD SCHEDULE

KSRM 920AM 
KSRM SCHEDULE 
ABC Perspective
America in the Morning with Jim Bohannon
America&#8217;s Business with Mike Hambrick
Battle Line with Alan Nathan
Best of Doug Stephan&#8217;s Talk Show
Bill Cunningham
Bobby Likus Car Clinic
Business Owner&#8217;s Toolkit
Car and Driver Radio
Dateline Washington
Equity Strategies
Glenn Beck
Good Parenting
Home and Family Finance
KSRM News Hour @ Noon
Money Talk with Bob Brinker
Morning Update with Matt Wilson
Motor Trend Radio
Motor Trend Weekend
National Geographic Weekend
Rusty Humphries
Sound-Off
Talk Radio Countdown with Doug Stephan
The Ben Ferguson Show
The Dave Ramsey Show
The Dr. Bob Martin Show
The Garden Rebel
The Michael Medved Show
The National Defense
The Savage Nation with Michael Savage
Tradio With Bryce (Monday &#8211; Friday Edition)
Tradio With Sean (Saturday Edition)


KWHQ 100.1FM 
KWHQ SCHEDULE 
25 Years Of Hits with Catfish Hunter
American Country Countdown with Kix Brooks
Country Music Greats Radio Show
New Music Nashville
Retro Country USA
Rise Up Country with John Ritter


Listen Online

Tradio


News

*Kenai Farm Named in Raw Milk Bacteria Outbreak*


Posted: February 25, 2013 at 5:15 pm
A local dairy farm involved in an outbreak of campylobacter has been named. Dr. Michael Cooper with the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services said an initial report of four cases soon evolved, and to date 18 have been identified in the outbreak.





00:00
00:00
00:00









_Dr. Cooper: &#8220;State veterinarian is going down there tomorrow with one of our Nurse Epidemiologists to do an on-site investigation. He&#8217;s been very cooperative, it&#8217;s Peninsula Dairy, and it&#8217;s a small operation, I think there are 10 cows total.&#8221;_

Dr. Cooper said the AKDHSS asked the farmer to notify his customers, and have evidence suggesting he has done so. He also said it&#8217;s likely that Peninsula Dairy is operating in a safe, clean manner, but bacterial outbreaks are a natural risk of drinking raw milk.

Note what is meant by "INVOLEMENT" is unclear. Testing has not pointed to his place it is known that he does cow shares--what is known is people got ill. I may appear stuborn but there is something eles that just might come out. I wonder why testing kev's place has not warrent a visit early for testing. He has been willing to work with him --even they own up to that. 

I would rather give and have FACTS than bull.


----------



## kasilofhome

Please Know that KEVIN was the only person who has OPENLY --as in newpaper interviews and signage that does milk. 

Most just are word of mouth. I know I had a dickens of a time when I was new here to find a lead and find one with a share open. There really have waiting list and limits as to quanity. I know people who get their one gallon for source A a week and then hope that they can find other milk. I have been asked I won't--I did the egg legally and I do give milk to one person no longer living in my home. 

I believe that there are milk sources operating with out the herd share and are under the table. Kevin is out there very public. I am hoping that the source IS found. Maybe soon.


----------



## Laura

Raw milk is always the first thing to fall under suspicion even if the culprit is a nasty kid failing to wash up then smearing germs everywhere they go.


----------



## southerngurl

You can get sick and die from absolutely any food, even cooked food, even pastuerized food. In fact, pastuerized milk has killed more people than raw.. raw has actually killed 0 in the 14 years it's been kept up with. Hamburgers and greens are the biggest food born illness offenders... yet even the pharmaceutically minded doctors tells you how good a salad is for you!

So why do some people get all in a fizz about raw milk making someone sick, but not cooked products? Or other raw products for that matter? Yes, you CAN get sick from raw milk, it's just not inherently dangerous like people say.. by the NUMBERS. 

Statistically, you are in far more danger driving to the farm to pick up your milk than drinking it. 

You don't want to drink it, that's fine! I don't want to eat a ding dong- but you go right ahead. Might make me a little sad, but it's not my call. I'm not your boss. I DO want to drink raw milk- and my neighbor would like to buy some from me to drink as well. It's not really any other person's business on either front. My body, my choice as far as another human should be concerned. Their body, their choice. And we all make both foolish and wise choices with our bodies from time to time. The only one who should tell me what to eat is God.


----------



## haypoint

http://barfblog.com/tags/campylobacter/


----------



## kasilofhome

Help me understand how anything can be traced back to Kevin when nothing was found at Kevin's farm. 

Local facts that are missing 

Kasilof has had a flu going around here since NOV. My son misses quite of few days. DH went on meds in Dec for it. It has be recycled and the joke is ban church for two weeks and we would all be done with it. 

Many of the weaker people (like dh) get the flu bug and get better but get it again and again and then get pnemonioa or broncitous. Now, most are NOT drinking the milk. We had only store milk (son can drink it --so no milk) goats birth in Jan 2 thur Jan 7 did not have milk for us till Mid Jan. 

So, we can rule out some milk casued illness for us and we Have pretty much ended the cycle around Feb 14 but dh-- he catches everything but preg. 

R and her crew have been sick since NOV-- she always gets sick then but her adult boys never do --they did this year. 


There are so many searching to demonize Milk from a farm that I am not buying this one. Even you article said his cows are healthy and well feed -- that is something a farmer can not rush and change over night to pass a test. Getting clean modern equip over night rush up to Kasilof is not going to happen. He has had clean healthy cows all along. He has kept his place clean all along, he has had clean modern equipment.

HE OPERATED LEGALLY and IS STILL open to the owners of the shares. IF they found real problems they would have to shut him down right. They can't with what the found in an all out witch hunt. He has a wait list that he can not fill. So, since his milk is limited could people be fill out their milk needs via persons not following the standards of Kevin's? Could there be a true source out there I think so. I get called often enough to sell milk. I get told that I am wasting that good milk on my animials. I can not afford to do it at the standards that I would want to so I do not do it. Simply not worth being a target for a witch hunt.


----------



## haypoint

Interesting story about the flu and other illnesses in your area. However the flu and other ailments are not related to Campylobactor. 

The State cannot shut down this dairy, he isn't selling milk. There are no laws against people drinking their own tainted milk.

Once the investigation is complete, lab results returned, etc, feel free to drop by your Health Department, submit a Freedom of Information Act request for all information about the recent Campylobactor outbreak. Then, and only then, will you know what they found at Byer's dairy.


----------



## kasilofhome

haypoint said:


> Interesting story about the flu and other illnesses in your area. However the flu and other ailments are not related to Campylobactor.
> 
> The State cannot shut down this dairy, he isn't selling milk. There are no laws against people drinking their own tainted milk.
> 
> Once the investigation is complete, lab results returned, etc, feel free to drop by your Health Department, submit a Freedom of Information Act request for all information about the recent Campylobactor outbreak. Then, and only then, will you know what they found at Byer's dairy.


 
How do you know for a fact that some of those that are sick and keep getting sick in their homes are not eating something and are ASSUMING that it is the FLU. Those distorting the "study" Why is it that though he tested CLEAN that you and slanting via words that "people can drink their own tainted milk" ---TAINTED MILK HAS Not been found --simply that a bacteria that CAN be in milk caused many to be sick--Agenda driven with a closed mind.


----------



## haypoint

When Clay Butcher gets back from his vacation from the AK Health Department, I hope to have the latest info on this. He won't be back unttil the 14th.


----------



## kasilofhome

Last year during a meeting with a local feed store the state vet Jay was so ask if since so many of the customers of milk were also customers of the shop if a fridg was provided if the milk could be store there. No hide and seek. This was last Jan.

Well, the state vet is against milk shares and informed the person that it was the hope and intent to stop Herd shares. 

Also in Jan of this year there was a public announcement ask for people with medical systoms or had had such systoms of the runs and stomach issues to contact them ----Witch hunt. This is a small community thus we question if the dept tested those people and how can you retro test people?

Sorry his farm has been found clean by your own sources you have provided.

Also since you are so connected let the dudes know that I was the one to inform and querry JAY our state vet of NAIS for which on the radio he laughed at the crazy idea that the gov wanted to have all farm animals tagged. He said and I quote. "I am a new father, I am not going to spend my time flying all over the state of Alaska to promote or work on such a program." He was lying or he was not up to speed--the state vet certainly got a major boost in travel in the state budget.


The Only NANNY I need is a NANNY GOAT


----------



## haypoint

Date: Tue 5 Mar 2013
Source: KTVA (edited)
<http://www.ktva.com/home/outbound-x...to-Raw-Milk-from-Kasilof-Dairy-195185231.html>

State health officials said Monday, 5 Mar 2013, that a total of 24 people have 
fallen ill, 2 of whom were hospitalized, after drinking tainted raw milk from a 
Kenai Peninsula dairy. Among the ill is an infant who did not directly imbibe 
the raw milk, but got sick through a secondary transmission from an adult who 
had. State epidemiologists said the illnesses are the result of milk tainted 
with _Campylobacter_, a bacterium commonly found in cow manure.

After receiving multiple reports of sick people, state health officials traced 
the source of the outbreak to a cow share program at the Peninsula Dairy. State 
veterinarians visited the farm to take samples and said the farm owner is being 
cooperative with their investigation. Dr. Brian Yablon, an epidemiologist with 
the State of Alaska, said that, with raw milk, infections like this are 
virtually unavoidable. "The bottom line for any operation that is providing raw 
milk," Yablon said, "[is] there's no way to make a sterile product...
and that's why, from a public health perspective, we encourage people if they're 
going to drink milk, to just drink pasteurized milk."

Backers of the nationwide raw milk movement have claimed that unpasteurized, 
unhomogenized raw milk -- from appropriately clean farms -- can provide a range 
of health benefits. But Yablon said the realities of milk production make raw 
milk inherently risky. "No matter how safe the process is thought to be, there 
is always potential for contamination," he said. "You have the absolute best of 
intentions, and the best of practices, but just the way the cow's anatomy is, 
the udder being so close to where the cow is excreting, the fact that the tail 
can flick things around, there are many different steps along the way where 
contamination can be introduced."

The last outbreak of campylobacteriosis state epidemiologists dealt with was 
from a 2011 outbreak in the Mat-Su Valley that sickened 18 people. That outbreak 
was also linked to raw milk from a cow-share program. "It's just not a product 
that's ever going to be 100 percent safe," Yablon said. "There's always the 
potential for contamination, and this is the latest example here in Alaska."

[Byline: Matthew F. Smith


----------



## unregistered168043

Oh get off the soap box already.


----------



## Lazaryss

haypoint said:


> Date: Tue 5 Mar 2013
> Source: KTVA (edited)
> <http://www.ktva.com/home/outbound-x...to-Raw-Milk-from-Kasilof-Dairy-195185231.html>
> 
> State health officials said Monday, 5 Mar 2013, that a total of 24 people have
> fallen ill, 2 of whom were hospitalized, after drinking tainted raw milk from a
> Kenai Peninsula dairy. Among the ill is an infant who did not directly imbibe
> the raw milk, but got sick through a secondary transmission from an adult who
> had. State epidemiologists said the illnesses are the result of milk tainted
> with _Campylobacter_, a bacterium commonly found in cow manure.
> 
> After receiving multiple reports of sick people, state health officials traced
> the source of the outbreak to a cow share program at the Peninsula Dairy. State
> veterinarians visited the farm to take samples and said the farm owner is being
> cooperative with their investigation. Dr. Brian Yablon, an epidemiologist with
> the State of Alaska, said that, with raw milk, infections like this are
> virtually unavoidable. "The bottom line for any operation that is providing raw
> milk," Yablon said, "[is] there's no way to make a sterile product...
> and that's why, from a public health perspective, we encourage people if they're
> going to drink milk, to just drink pasteurized milk."
> 
> Backers of the nationwide raw milk movement have claimed that unpasteurized,
> unhomogenized raw milk -- from appropriately clean farms -- can provide a range
> of health benefits. But Yablon said the realities of milk production make raw
> milk inherently risky. "No matter how safe the process is thought to be, there
> is always potential for contamination," he said. "You have the absolute best of
> intentions, and the best of practices, but just the way the cow's anatomy is,
> the udder being so close to where the cow is excreting, the fact that the tail
> can flick things around, there are many different steps along the way where
> contamination can be introduced."
> 
> The last outbreak of campylobacteriosis state epidemiologists dealt with was
> from a 2011 outbreak in the Mat-Su Valley that sickened 18 people. That outbreak
> was also linked to raw milk from a cow-share program. "It's just not a product
> that's ever going to be 100 percent safe," Yablon said. "There's always the
> potential for contamination, and this is the latest example here in Alaska."
> 
> [Byline: Matthew F. Smith


Congratulations. I think you finally touched on something we agree on. "Tainted" milk. Be it from any source, tainted milk is bad. It's not just raw milk.


----------



## Lazaryss

So how do you feel about breast feeding Haypoint?


----------



## kasilofhome

And what did the test results from the farm find????????????

Words that lead but NEVER proclaim a medical PROOF of the source but they found a farmer to mislead (if they could prove what they want ---(which is to demonize farmer and raw milk)

The wording the state is using is clearly leading to push the agenda of evil milk and we know were the milk is flowing from. Where are the test results proving that that farm is the source? It has been tested, viewed and gone over in high gov. hope finding anything which would cause the illness. But why no test results that prove it .. This is how it has played out most of the time. It is to simply done to control out of fear. 

NO POSITIVE TEST AT THE FARM STILL.


----------



## haypoint

Lazaryss said:


> So how do you feel about breast feeding Haypoint?


If Mom has been rolling in cow patties, maybe not.
But to again explain, I don't have a problem with folks drinking their own milk, from their own cow, milked by them on their own farm.

But when you are selling milk, on a commercial basis, that's selling raw milk and I'm against it because of the health risks.

IMHO, milk shares is a way around the illegal selling of raw milk. But understand, if you or a family member gets violently ill, you have nearly no recourse. Your milk from your cow, you deal with it. 

I will continue to add information on people that got sick from drinking raw milk.


----------



## Laura

You know, Haypoint, I was visciously attacked and gang banged for posting research studies from top universities proving and detailing the neurological damage caused by the chemicals in the American Food Chain. Truth is, people don't care what they shove in their pieholes no matter how crappy it makes them feel as long as it tastes good to THEM.

It's no different with raw milk. When it's good, it's the best and a very healthy choice. Everything has it's risks. Whole natural raw food still has much lower overall health risks than the standard prepackaged American Diet or eating at fast food joints and restaurants.

Perhps you should bust open a bag of flavored Doritos, some dip and drink a can of Red Bull.


----------



## haypoint

I am saddened that you would equate a negative post to rape.

I'd like to believe that whole natural food has less risks, but it isn't true.
Whole natural foods are more likely to be fertilized with manure, not chemical fertilizers. 
Carrots are often given a wash with weak bleach, to kill soil bacteria.


----------



## kasilofhome

I am saddened that you think and wish to control what food people eat. Raw milk is historically the way to serve it. People resent being inslaved for an agenda. As a Female I wish to claim that it is MY BODY and I am prochoice as to what I consume. Personally I firmily believe that there is a higher rate of DEATH (not just sickness) with the other group of PRO CHOICE.


It is your right to live your life attempting to control others and it is your right to give up you right to provide for yourself. Can you allow food freedom. In speaking to some people who are milk animal share owners they want their right to do so and the parents are willing to be parents for minor children. Yea, a bit old fashion. 

When will they come for me? When will the say I must serve what I am told too? 

From the moment I took my first breath I was on the path to death. With or with out raw milk I will die . I have no fear of death as logically it is unavoidable. 

Live is all risk---funny you do not even know if our home milk is raw or past. as that will never be the point --that is private. But freedom is important.


----------



## Laura

Having been a country person my entire life, much of it on farms, I'm sure I've ingested plenty of manure. So have my kids. You haven't had fun until you've been in a Pie Fight with warm steaming Cow Pies. 
ALL my vegetables are grown in manure. WE DON"T DO CHEMICALS! WE DON"T DO CITY WATER, IT MAKES US SICK. Funny, but rolling around in Duck Spluck and slapping each other with it does NOT make my kids sick.

When we still had our cow, she produced 3-5 gallons of milk a day. Even with making cheese it was way more milk than my family could use. It is illegal to sell dairy in my state without a license. By your logic, our milk should only be used as toxic waste fertilizer, even though there were hungry families and a high demand for it in my neighborhood.

For us farm families, the risks of getting sick from ingesting something BAD are way higher if we buy it at the store or eat in town.

Food Freedom is very important to us. That I cannot buy additive free cream at the store is disturbing. That almost everything at the store is adulterated, that your drinking water is adulterated should concern you more than a handful of bad milk incidences.


----------



## haypoint

Darntootin said:


> Oh get off the soap box already.


read the title. You chose to come to this thread, knowing what it is about.


----------



## haypoint

Raw milk still off-limits in Indiana
Angela Bowman, Staff Writer
DairyHerd.com
March 6, 2013


After months of back and forth efforts to permit raw milk sales in Indiana, lawmakers have made it clear that raw milk remains off-limits for human consumption.

According to Food Safety News, last year the Indiana General Assembly was mulling legalizing raw milk sales in stores, and after passing one change in the law requiring raw milk to be labeled as "not for human consumption," it asked the Indiana Board of Animal Health (BOAH) to complete a study on the safety of raw milk.

The report, "Indiana State Board of Animal Health Report on the Issue of Selling Unpasteurized Milk to Consumers," released last December, not only examined the risks involved with raw milk consumption but also outlined standards that would be necessary in the event that raw milk sales were legalized.

In the report, the BOAH concluded "that pasteurization is a practice that is highly effective in reducing the risk of human illness from pathogens in raw milk. Distributing raw milk for human consumption will increase the risk that someone will become ill from consuming raw milk. But the decision to authorize or not the sale of unpasteurized milk to consumers is ultimately a political decision."


----------



## kasilofhome

Still not one solid bit of direct proof that the farm mentioned had a problem> smear and run>


----------



## JohnP

Might as well just quit eating or drinking anything as nothing is safe.

*So far this year for Meat, Poultry and Egg. *
Beef, listeria, E coli, Salmonella 
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Recall_Case_Archive/index.asp

These are the "active cases". ("undeclared allergens" and "foreign material" too)
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp

*Now for Non Meat, Poultry and Egg.*
More listeria, salmonella and foreign material PLUS metal and glass fragments. Nice
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/default.htm#Link_to_Food

Pretty much one a day and that's only what gets found. Food strikes again! 
and again and again.


----------



## digApony

Sawmill Jim said:


> Being raise in farm country just how many critters did they have on 5 acres ?? Here when the old timers were milking a few head their pasture was quite large the milk house you could eat off the floor too:hammer:


Yes, I thought the same thing when I read a heard on five acres. I'm not an expert, but there are many different strains of E coli, mostly good as living flora in the intestines of warm blooded animals, including humans. It hasn't been until late that the bad strains of E-coli has evolved.

I drink raw milk that I buy from the Amish across the road from me. However, it is the processed foods and milk that I am more concerned about. 

I don't know what to think anymore. E-coli is on the rise in most every food and listeria is still found in pasteurized dairy products in the grocery stores.

digApony


----------



## digApony

haypoint said:


> I am saddened that you would equate a negative post to rape.
> 
> I'd like to believe that whole natural food has less risks, but it isn't true.
> Whole natural foods are more likely to be fertilized with manure, not chemical fertilizers.
> Carrots are often given a wash with weak bleach, to kill soil bacteria.


Being from the Midwest and when passing through corn field after corn field in the summer, the smell of manure was overwhelming. I don't know of any home farmer or gardener that doesn't use manure. Once manure has decayed there is no risk of E-coli or any other bacteria as the bacteria cannot survive that long.

You cannot blame natural food farmers or the lack of preventative food processing for E-coli. The latest and most serious E-coli strain is a recent occurrence. Yes, it's in poop, but not ALL poop.

I would rather concern myself with GMO Frakenfoods, because GMO's do much more harm to humans than ever thought possible.

digApony


----------



## digApony

kasilofhome said:


> Yep, he is in the cow share program--He delivers hay to me. He is out there--so what would be the odds that he has been tested and they STILL DO NOT KNOW THE SOURCE.


Since the bacteria that causes illness does not exist but at the most 10 days, it is almost impossible to determine where the bacteria originated. They can only guess.


----------



## digApony

Big milk has duped the American people into thinking that the only safe milk is pasteurized milk.

Pasteurization began initially to prolong shelf life. In the last decade all of the reported salmonella cases were from pasteurized milk.

Now Big Milk has introduced Ultra-Pasteurization that produces an even longer shelf life. The biggest milk corporation's scientists cooked this one up so they can further monopolize the milk industry and force out the smaller milk companies. Ultra-Pasteurization can be shipped across and around the nation and still arrive on your table in all its dead glory. All of the protein has been denatured and you might as well drink water.

Listera is found and recalls happen frequently in cottage cheese, especially Breakstones'. I see they're still in business. 

Salmonella has recently occurred in eggs because egg producers are required to chemically wash the egg. Washing the egg removes the protective barrier. So when I make my mother's yummy chiffon pie or lemon meringue pie, I am sure to use farm fresh eggs.

And GMO's ?? Oh gosh... too much to list.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

digApony,

Gosh. You have gone from concern about a product you consume regularly to the opposite fringe in less than 24 hours. 

There is really no need to extrapolate raw milk consumption to the evils of Monsanto.

Just know the risks of raw milk and use your judgement.
I would imagine that everything will be fine. 
For all intents and purposes the milk you buy is grown right where you live.
Nobody has said you shouldn't drink it. 

Cheers! :buds:


----------



## digApony

gone-a-milkin said:


> digApony,
> 
> Gosh. You have gone from concern about a product you consume reglarly to the opposite fringe in less than 24 hours.
> 
> There is really no need to extrapolate raw milk consumption to the evils of Monsanto.
> 
> Just know the risks of raw milk and use your judgement.
> I would imagine that everything will be fine.
> For all intents and purposes the milk you buy is grown right where you live.
> Nobody has said you shouldn't drink it.
> 
> Cheers! :buds:


haha Ya I know. I tend to be politically opinionated. But honestly, before I read the big write up in the paper regarding the dangers of raw milk, I never even knew the danger existed! Ya, I'm not the brightest bulb in the box. I don't even drink it for any perceived health benefit. It just tastes better...and butter and ice cream. So yes, I got a little...no a lot nervous, and big scares by the government tend to irritate me a little.  Thanks.


----------



## gone-a-milkin

Honestly, I believe that is why haypoint posts these topics.
It is to help people be aware of the risks they are taking.
It isn;'t to dissuade people from using their discernment at all.

You are obviously aware and willing to risk it. 
That is all cool with most everyone here.


----------



## kasilofhome

All those people down here who got sick and drank milk and had the very same type of bad stuff so it had to be the milk ----NOT found at the farm--- multi testing yes 3 are now claimed to have been found but not the one that everyone one was sick with.

The state vet is worried cause so so many are at risk with non commerical milk but his hands are tied because it is "legal" here. That is what this is all about... Witch hunt 

Even though the state folks called the buyer to scare them they are still buying. Only 5 percent of food is local and most of that is harvest from the waters hunting regs have cut the moose and such from many freezers. That 5 percent is state wide out of the cities we have a much higher percent. People grow, milk, hunt, raise, can, smoke, pickle, freeze and dry all that they can in more rural areas. People get sick every year from mistakes but they eat. 

Kevin customers are standing by him.


----------



## haypoint

http://www.adn.com/2013/03/27/2842404/peninsula-dairy-plans-to-continue.html


----------



## digApony

Tennessee Department of Health records show two raw milk infection incidents in the last five years, spokesman Woody McMillin said. In 2008, four people in Polk County were infected with campylobacter, which could have come from either raw milk they bought in Georgia or their own well water. In 2010, three people in Knox County got E. coli from raw milk collected on their own farm. None went to the hospital, McMillin said.

In addition to campylobacter and E. coli, there's a risk of getting salmonella. From 1998-2009, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention figures show, 1,837 people were made ill by raw milk, nearly 200 went to the hospital and two died. There are countless other cases never documented, Critzer said.

A few points here is that the source of the bacteria is not always discernible.
The stats nationwide are low.
1,837 nationwide, but the statistics are not specific to which bacteria.
"Countless other cases are never documented..." highly misleading and statistically inaccurate; especially when the bacteria source is undeterminable in documented cases.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/02/04/health-claims-raw-milk-debated/1889987/

"Then we had women bootlegging milk from one or two cows, and I thought, 'Why are we treating these salt-of-the-earth people like criminals?'" Niceley said. "You can eat raw oysters and raw fish."

What concerns me is the ambulance chasing attorneys that have already filed lawsuits for people who suffered or died from food borne bacteria from any source; beef, chicken, eggs, raw fish, pasteurized dairy products and raw milk. It will only take one law suit to wipe out the family farm.

Haypoint, I appreciate your warning, but I do think we should be careful where we lay the blame, especially without considering the large amounts of documented dangerous bacteria that also exists in commercially processed food. (Which I believe has mislead people into believing it is safe.)

Thanks, digApony


----------



## arabian knight

Sure the numbers are low. That is because not that many in a population of 300+ million drink raw milk.
If the MAJORITY of the population would be drinking raw milk the numbers would be SKY HIGH.
And THAT is where the problem lies.
Drink it all you want on your own farm, but when Selling it that is another story all together.~!
And selling across State lines is a whole new bailiwick, and better come under the watchful eyes of the USDA and its rules and regulations~!


----------



## digApony

gone-a-milkin said:


> Honestly, I believe that is why haypoint posts these topics.
> It is to help people be aware of the risks they are taking.
> It isn;'t to dissuade people from using their discernment at all.
> 
> You are obviously aware and willing to risk it.
> That is all cool with most everyone here.


Thanks! I appreciate these topics. And I also like to participate.


----------



## kasilofhome

NO the proof that any of the people got sick from the milk IS NOT THERE. TESTING and TESTING and what got the people ill was not in the MILK. The are hinting they are reaching they are trying so hard to make the case but in the end it is not there and the people want the milk. Samples after samples of milk and people but never will they test anything but the milk. It was not the milk and they are still trying to scare people. They will not stop not because they care about the sick people if they did they would try to find the REAL source --that is not the adgenda the adgenda is to remove the choice of the people and get them in line--CONTROL.


----------



## digApony

arabian knight said:


> Sure the numbers are low. That is because not that many in a population of 300+ million drink raw milk.
> If the MAJORITY of the population would be drinking raw milk the numbers would be SKY HIGH.
> And THAT is where the problem lies.
> Drink it all you want on your own farm, but when Selling it that is another story all together.~!
> And selling across State lines is a whole new bailiwick, and better come under the watchful eyes of the USDA and its rules and regulations~!


I respectively disagree. With the cattle, dairy and rural farming make up of TN, especially Middle TN, a lot of people drink raw milk and have been doing so for years. We also have one of the largest Amish communities outside of PA and they have consumed raw milk in every manner of use for many years. There is also a large homeschooling and homesteading population that does the same. And you cannot say that the Amish cannot be counted in raw milk poisonings, because the Amish do use doctors.

However, since pasteurization was initially utilized to maintain shelf life, I agree that buying commercially sold raw milk would be a bad idea and a much higher risk.

digApony


----------



## kasilofhome

After the state health department linked the outbreak to Byers' farm, it collected fecal and milk samples from his cows. Lab results found three strains of campylobacter from samples collected at his farm, *but none matched the confirmed strains that made people sick, Gerlach said*


Note this is after repeated testing that he was clean -- folks here are firm that suddenly with the people still demanding to make use of the cow shares and it being legal a bad test comes up and it does not match out.

Very few people gave up their cow shares and he has a wait list. still and he --with the help of the government is a hero to the locals because he is meeting the needs of the people while under threat from the government. I said from the beginining that it was NOT the milk--it was something else they had in common. This is a small town where potlucks and group meals are the norm. Having the spotlight on the milk well was a mistake. A lot of people want fresh produce here in the winter and a lot of people got hoop houses hum......................................................... a head of lettuse is 2.99 a tiny head..............................................................add that to all the stored fish for the holidays and ............................................Thanksgiving and Christmas season wonder just how many shared meals were served. Na...just check the cow share program.


----------



## haypoint

digApony said:


> I respectively disagree. With the cattle, dairy and rural farming make up of TN, especially Middle TN, a lot of people drink raw milk and have been doing so for years. We also have one of the largest Amish communities outside of PA and they have consumed raw milk in every manner of use for many years. There is also a large homeschooling and homesteading population that does the same. And you cannot say that the Amish cannot be counted in raw milk poisonings, because the Amish do use doctors.
> 
> However, since pasteurization was initially utilized to maintain shelf life, I agree that buying commercially sold raw milk would be a bad idea and a much higher risk.
> 
> digApony


I believe that Amish use doctors but don't run to town for a few days of vomiting. The ones I know, don't. But I don't claim to know all Amish in the world and expect you don't either. 
Originally, milk was pasteurized to kill dangerous bacteria. That effects shelf life. They sort of go together. The lack of bacteria results in less bacteria in improperly handled milk, too. Since 99% of the milk consumption in the US is pasteurized, therefore there will always be some improperly processed milk or milk containers. 
The link I posted earlier doesn't work, http://www.adn.com/2013/03/27/2842404/peninsula-dairy-plans-to-continue.html
" As of March 22, there have been 34 cases of illnesses, and in all the cases, the individuals have had associations with Peninsula Dairy, said Brian Yablon, an epidemiologist for the Alaska Section of Epidemiology. Seven of the 34 cases have been confirmed in a lab as campylobacter infection, he said. No one has died from the infection, he said.
The Campylobacter infection is a common problem on farms, said Bob Gerlach, state veterinarian.

More than 90 percent of dairy farms in the Lower 48 owned cows that tested positive for the campylobacter bacteria, according to a National Animal Health Monitoring System study from the United States Department of Agriculture."
"After the state health department linked the outbreak to Byers' farm, it collected fecal and milk samples from his cows. Lab results found three strains of campylobacter from samples collected at his farm, but none matched the confirmed strains that made people sick, Gerlach said."It's not unusual that you may find one strain of campylobacter there and it may get replaced by another strain that (the cows) pick up in the environment," he said.

In cold climates different strains of the bacteria can cycle through a farm quickly as they die out, he said. That could have been what happened on Byers' farm, Gerlach said."
"About a fourth of the shareholders called said they stopped drinking the milk because of the infection. Others said they still buy the milk but pasteurize it at home, "and other people have decided to keep doing exactly what they've been doing," Yablon said." 

​Make up your own mind. I'm just reporting the information. Since nationally 90% of cows have Campylobactor, the Dairy had several strains of Campylobactor on the farm and in the cows and 34 people got sick and all had consumed milk from that single small dairy.​If you want to believe the facts were made up, fine. But do you also believe the cases prior to this set of sicknesses is also false and the one before that? How about the next case? They are reported in the NEWS with great regularity. 
Healthy looking cows from spotless dairies carry diseases. That's the bottom line. Make your choices from that.


----------



## kasilofhome

In cold climates different strains of the bacteria can -----(But is there any proof that that happened or is it to simply implicate an agenda when the adgenda can not be proven) cycle through a farm quickly as they die out, he said. *That could have (more implication to push an agenda) been what happened on Byers' farm, Gerlach said."*
"About a fourth of the shareholders called *said they stopped* *--(**a few did more just wanted the calls to stop---- then add in that he had a waiting list )*.drinking the milk because of the infection. Others said they still buy the milk but pasteurize it at home, "and other people have decided to keep doing exactly what they've been doing,"


*The Department of Health cleared the dairy of any wrongdoing in the campylobacter outbreak,* saying it&#8217;s simply an in-built hazard of drinking raw milk. Byers said he enjoyed having the health inspectors on his farm&#8230;


If you want you can go to KSRM Radio and then to news and go back a few pages of stories and you can listen to the News reports in peoples own words.


----------



## haypoint

Calm down. There is no need to yell.

It depends on your version of "wrong doing". Since most cows have campylobacter in them and their milk, selling raw milk that contains campylobacter is to be expected. 
The dairy is just milking the cows that are owned by the shareholders. Seems he did his job.


----------



## kasilofhome

Not yelling just do not want FACTS lost in fine print 

Will you also own up or do you disagree that since the illness was tracked to a certain campylobacter and it was NEVER found in the milk, equip, cow, or area even with the testing done so much and so broadly at his farm that he is a victim of a wrong direction search?

See, people and families and farm are often hurt so deeply with false studies and when that happens the squeaky loud anti milk governmental agencys simply say quietly --MY bad have a nice day.

This is a small community and one landslide, avalanche, earthquake, wild fire, and we are on our own --we at least want food thus there is great respect for those with such skills. Yet, as separate as we are in history this little place spotted warring Japaness planes in the air. The military was informed via a network of communitcations.

Reports from HT members and how they have be focased anf harmed by such investigations. Next Nov. Dec and Jan we will again see the same illness hit this area. Why culture, events, and lifestyles. Winter is a very social time and we will again be mixing a few ill people at potlucks, it is dark and cold people gather closely indoors add in that there are many who's only water source is hauled in --some never clean their 5 gallon water container, many ration cleaning. So, if some adgency wants to seek out activly if people are sick and why they could CHOOSE to have an agenday and find that Over 90 percent had the dump in common or 90 percent of the population touched one of four gas hosed to get gas for trucks. Having an agenda guides the results. An open mind looking at the facts just might find that there is not one but MANY factors that ALL play arole in why a community has a pattern of illness.


----------



## haypoint

When TB was discovered in a large dairy in California, they were able to trace it back to Michigan two ways. It had the required for MI RFID ear tag and the strain of TB found is the strain that is unique to Michigan infected cattle and wild deer. 
Campylobactor strains change rapidly. 
Johnes is difficult to test for because a cow can have it but not be &#8220;sheding&#8221; the diseases and test negative for Johnes. 
Tests for diseases and bacteria are different than a sure fire home pregnancy test. Mad Cow has no positive test, it requires experienced visual identification. Same for TB. 
Rapid trace back is important if you are ever going to find the source of a bacterial or disease outbreak. 
Let&#8217;s step away from the Alaskan campylobacter situation. 
As an example, imagine I bought 4 boxes of Girl Scout cookies. I shared them with 40 friends at work. The next day, 30 people reported getting sick. No one did anything, there is a lot of flu going around. The following day, 10 workers were so sick, they went to the hospital. A few days later, several hospitals reported to the local Health Department that there were many people reporting the same type of symptoms and it wasn&#8217;t the flu. A few days later the Health Department assembles the names and addresses of the sick people and questions them. Some had eaten spinach in the past week. Some had eaten cantaloupes in the past week. Some had eaten at the same fast food place. But they all had eaten Girl Scout Cookies. They tested 100 vomit samples and it was positive for e coli, and salmonella. 
The boxes mine had been in went out with the trash. People all over town were asked to turn in their Girl Scout Cookies for testing. But the cookies were all eaten up. The Health Department listed 1000 people in the two counties that had eaten Girl Scout Cookies and 800 had reported getting sick. Every person that got sick, had eaten those cookies. 
So, the Health Department traced that batch of cookies to a bakery in Sitka, AK. They did find e coli and salmonella, but a different strain than that found in the vomit of the sick folks. The bakery is told to work towards keeping the bakery and products clean. By the time the Health Department tracked down the source, the place had cleaned up a few dozen times between batches. You want proof? Nope, often there isn&#8217;t going to be any. 
If you got sick from a day old Girl scout cookie and the Health Department deployed an inspector that same day, it is likely that the tainted batch was gone, and a fresh batch was all that remained. It is very difficult to assign blame unless the bakery had an ongoing health problem. 
In this latest raw milk illnesses, the dairy farmer is the good guy, just milking other people&#8217;s cows and the heavy handed government is wrong because it can&#8217;t find what was once there but no longer remains. By legalizing herd shares, the Health Department has a limited role in such private operations. Herd share milk is not in the public food supply.
Most cases of tainted raw milk end up inconclusive. Not because it didn&#8217;t happen, but because the evidence is fleeting. One day the cow steps in the pail, the next day it doesn&#8217;t. 
I started this thread to allow folks that are interested in knowing about the regular instances where people are sickened by raw milk and products made from raw milk to gather that information. I doubt that further detailed discussions will result in changing one&#8217;s mind. 
So far there are seven pages on this topic. There are many other reported cases, not listed here, plus many illnesses that go unreported. 
The fact that your uncle drank raw milk for 50 years without reported harm is as irrelevant as the person that bedded prostitutes for 50 years and never contracted a STD. Both are risks I chose not to take.


----------



## kasilofhome

I started this thread to allow folks that are interested in knowing about the regular instances where people are sickened by raw milk and products made from raw milk to gather that information. 

*Not a problem only remember that in the end of the witch hunt at kev's place it was proven that there was NO PROOF his milk caused any illness --only specualtion after all the testing. This farm should not be placed in a file or in the mind as having PROVEN to be an instances where people were sickened by raw milk.*

*In the end there was and empty hand of proof still attempting to point a finger of guilt at him. We are all proud of how Kev has handled this openly with nothing to hide. If his milk had been the source he is the man who would have stood up --and it is because of the concern he has and the effort he put in his work that makes him a respected valuable member of our communtity.*


----------



## haypoint

Kev doesn't have to stand up. They weren't his cows. He's just the milker.

Every year people get away with murder for lack of evidence. They are still murderers, just there wasn't enough evidence to convict. 

It is obvious to me that the 34 people that got sick after drinking their herd share milk from Kev's farm, got sick from their herd share milk. There was campylobacter in their milk. There was campylobacter in their bellies. There was campylobacter in their herd share cows. It would have been a "cleaner" case if the campylobacter strains matched the victims, their milk and the strain at the dairy. But, nature doesn't cooperate with the Laboratories and public Health Department's wishes. The change in strains was normal and expected, but that doesn't change the fact that there was campylobacter that made 37 people sick and campylobacter continues to be in those cows. 

A refusal to cooperate with the Health Department would have resulted in a quarantine and loss of his license to operate. I suspect Kev is smart enough to know that and understand that in a herd share, much liability is shifted away from him and onto the official cow owners. Nicely played, Kev.


----------



## kasilofhome

He got the cows, he cares for the cows, he sells and manages the shares and he milks the cows, selects and cares for the equipment. The agency and you provided his name ==he has been the center of this witch hunt.

So, you are not yet will to accept the agencys findings..... You are so funny. yes, people got sick --So did I and my family and we did not touch any product that came from his farm. The test results did not match ---excuses and justifcations that the goal was not meet by your ilk. --Look I have had to eat crow here when I have been wrong. Why test if you any yours will not accept the results? FEAR instilling for the sake of control. If they wanted too care about the people why limit it to milk ?

It is obvious to me that the 34 people that got sick after drinking their herd share milk from Kev's farm Quote of Haypoint ---Yet with all the testing of the farm and milk and cows science does not support your position.

*34 people got sick --yes, why is not proven-- despite all the testing an assumption that it was the milk. *

*And now per haypoint ---- He is snide to a farmer who followed the law at all times-- public respected the tester and investagators and publically invited them back as he has nothing to hide --the liability is shifted ? No, the owners are aware prior to the sale of a share the owners are educated and the owners are not force be become owners-- some like responcablity. Your trying to taint Kev and raw milk as a problem --- well reponcable people need less outside control and thus they are a threat to power hungry controling people. *A refusal to cooperate with the Health Department would have resulted in a quarantine and loss of his license to operate. I suspect Kev is smart enough to know that and understand that in a herd share, much liability is shifted away from him and onto the official cow owners. Nicely played, Kev. 

*Like*


----------



## haypoint

I didn&#8217;t intend on being snide to the farmer. None of the testing disproves my position. The folks that drank his raw milk got sick from campylobacter. Campylobactor, known to change strains rapidly, was a different strain by the time the Health Department got out to the farm and got the tests run. But there was, as could be expected, campylobacter on the farm. 
OK, you were right. There is no smoking gun, just a gun. Most cases of raw milk contamination end inconclusively. 
I do not intend to depict raw milk as a problem. It is the inevitable problem of bacteria and disease inherent in raw milk that is the problem. Responsible, independent, freedom loving people get sick when fed milk containing TB, listeria, campylobacter, salmonella or e coli. When a taxpayer funded agency is directed by the people to insure a safer food supply, it is unfair to paint them as power hungry controllers. From what I&#8217;ve seen, any criticism would be their slow reaction to locating the source and span of time that elapsed before they ran any tests at the dairy. I would hope they could move a bit quicker when hoof and mouth disease impacts your sleepy little community.
I never intended to imply that Kev broke any State laws. His use of herd shares absolves him from most laws and regulations. You are free to believe that all herd shareholders knew about the risks of listeria, campylobacter, e coli, TB and they knew the symptoms, too. I doubt that and I base that doubt on the fact that some shareholders are now pasteurizing their milk as a safety consideration. 
Is it your love of freedom and hate of everything government that incites your emotions on this issue? If a Cargill processing plant put out a million pounds of tainted hamburger, making a million people sick, but when the USDA inspected the plant, found no e coli in the factory, would you defend Cargill?
If I sold 20 pigs to 40 people, offered to kill them, skin them and throw them into the back of my truck and haul the pork 60 miles to a converted garage butcher operation, but after they picked up their processed pork, a few people got sick from eating it, is it my fault? It was, after all, their pigs, I was just taking care of their pork. Would you agree with the Health Department that states, &#8220;Such levels of bacteria are inherent in such methods of butchering.&#8221; As is true of raw milk?


----------



## kasilofhome

What keeps me on this is that kev was assumed guilty and even when the test show that those sick got something not found in the milk from his farm.

So, test are worthless and failable when your point is not supported.
the agency did a poor job because they did not move faster.

I do not hate government I know their place and I know where it is not their place.
People were provided with info and paper work prior to a drop of milk. I have faith that people have an obigation to protect themself ---reading paperwork kinda important (kinda wish congress knew that). 

Just can't come to grip with the fact that those people who got sick who drank milk also consumed other stuff not tested. You do not like to use the number of 150 milk shares in homes with larger than average family sizes and even if you just used every milk share went to homes were there was only ONE person then the ratio would be 34 out of 150 even got sick and if you look at five people per share (pretty normal size here) you would be laughing at 34 to 750 people involed. All during a time when the local school had a very high percentage of students and teacher out sick -- when one church did not meet to reduce spreading illness. Sorry but it is easyier to say yea I am pasturizing at home now (while saying in your head and to family--I sure hope that shuts them up and gets them to leave me alone.) Some people even got home pasturizers to placate the agency ---Look up craigs list-- and local bulletin board you can get one now cause they are up for sale --in new condition --never used condition. but that is not noted.


----------



## haypoint

It is not true that the test proved that they got sick from something other than raw milk from that farm. I think the Health Department did alright, given the situation. Just would have been easier to prove if they had gotten the tests completed before the strain changed.
I think we went through this argument a while back. Raw milk from that dairy was the single common denominator. People in families that ate other things, but drank milk got sick. People that shared meals but didn&#8217;t drink milk, didn&#8217;t get sick. Raw milk and cows are known to carry campylobacter. Those tested had campylobacter. 
For some, the reaction to the bacteria was small, to others, more severe. Disease is strange. Recently in a dairy herd of over 500, 75 cows contracted TB. They share water cups, feed bunks and hay feeders. This is a closed herd and has been closed for decades. Why didn&#8217;t they all have TB? 
Can I assume he produces 150 one gallon shares each week? Would that mean that he bottles daily? We have no way of knowing how many days the heavily contaminated campylobacter milk was bottled or how many days the tainted milk sat in the bulk tank. We really don&#8217;t know if he suffered a mechanical breakdown that allowed the accelerated levels of bacteria that led to the sicknesses. 
From personal experience, pasteurizers have a fairly rapid turnaround time. I owned one once. It was an energy hog and a pain in the backside to use and clean. Not as bad as a cream separator, but still took too much time. Good to see those that have one are capturing this new interest in pasteurization to rid themselves of this unwieldy appliance. 
Are you saying that this group of fiercely independent pioneers are afraid of the Health Departments questions and concerns? 
I wish you had the time to sit down with the Health Department and ask those tough questions. Get them to explain how they knew it was milk and see what they are sure of and what they aren&#8217;t sure of. Ask the dairy operator about the campylobacter they found in his cows and what he can do to keep it out of the milk. See what his new testing schedule is. How many ppm is considered safe?
Healthy looking cows, fed healthy looking feed and milked in a healthy looking environment can still produce milk with high enough bacterial levels to sicken most folks.


----------



## kasilofhome

Never did I say that that they were afraid --just that they WERE bugged --intruded apond. A
It is not true that the test proved that they got sick from something other than raw milk from that farm.
The result of the test was the milk did not test for the same what got the people sick. So is it impossidable since it did not match that it came from another source. Seems logical to me

I hate to say it but

If it dosen't fit ....................................

Got to go


----------



## haypoint

kasilofhome said:


> Never did I say that that they were afraid --just that they WERE bugged --intruded apond. A
> It is not true that the test proved that they got sick from something other than raw milk from that farm.
> The result of the test was the milk did not test for the same what got the people sick. So is it impossidable since it did not match that it came from another source. Seems logical to me
> 
> I hate to say it but
> 
> If it dosen't fit ....................................
> 
> Got to go


You'd be absolutely correct if we were talking about TB. That strain is stable. But we are talking about a disease bacteria that changes strains regularly and with a good degree of rapidity. The cows that the Health Department found with campylobacter last week will likely test with a different strain next week. You know this because it was in the NEWS reports posted earlier.
Now, if they had found campylobacter in the herd share folks, but not in the cows, you'd have a very strong argument. If they found listeria in the raw milk at the homes of the herd share folks and campylobacter in the cows and no listeria, you'd have another strong case. But they found campylobacter in both places. 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2168669/

 Campylobacter hyointestinalis, Campylobacter coli, Campylobacter jejuni are the main types of campylobacter, but there are over a hundred strains, for cattle. Shellfish have different strains. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19406805

Cattle are also common carriers of campylobacters (23, 25, 49). However, beef is not considered to be an important vehicle of transmission in human infections, because campylobacters are not commonly detected on carcasses or in beef. In surveys of retail beef only 0 to 5% of the samples have tested positive for campylobacters (42, 50, 55). Instead, the importance of *raw milk* as a risk factor for human campylobacteriosis has been recognized in epidemiological studies (33, 51), and consumption of unpasteurized milk has been associated with campylobacter infections in several outbreaks (12, 30, 47, 51). The environmental load of campylobacters in cattle manure may be a more significant factor in the transmission of infections than contaminated milk or beef (36, 39). 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1907110/


----------



## gone-a-milkin

My experience has been that every person handles bacteria loads differently.
I am convinced that it is related to how active your own personal gut flora are.

One could make a cocktail of all the 'bad' bac and feed it to many folks and they would not ALL become ill from it.

Very similar to why the native folks in various places can drink the water there,
but they caution visitors against doing so.

Kasilofhome, I have been reading your posts about the canning and food handling practiceswhere you live too.
It does add another dynamic to the situation.

One thought I had was that if folks were already sick (from a virus or whatever) they might react more strongly to camplyobacter in the milk
Because their immune systems were already compromised. Maybe? 
Certainly anyone who had recently gone through a round of antibiotics would have a system weakened against oppositional bacteria
being introduced.

Just ideas I ponder.


----------



## haypoint

Cancer-causing fungus found in raw milk
The Local [edited], 7 Mar 2013

High levels of a cancer-causing fungus has been found in raw milk from a western German farm. The authorities in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia suspect contaminated cow feed from Serbia.

Before being pasteurized, milk from the farm had twice as much aflatoxin -- produced by the Aspergillus species of mold -- than national standards allow. There was a possibility that the contaminated raw milk had already been sent to dairies for processing, the state Consumer Protection Ministry said. 

Until the milk has levels below 50 nanograms of aflatoxin per kilogram of milk it may not be sold. Current levels were around 100 nanograms.

Milk from cows which have ingested aflatoxin -- one of the strongest naturally occurring carcinogens -- is "particularly dangerous," said Udo Paschedag from Lower Saxony's Agriculture Ministry. Full story - http://www.thelocal.de/national/20130307-48387.html


----------



## haypoint

Thirteen people have become ill with salmonellosis from eating a raw Mexican-style cheese, queso fresco. Officials are warning people of the health risks of eating unpasteurized dairy products.

MDH has confirmed 11 cases of infection with Salmonella Typhimurium. Eight were hospitalized. Other family members became ill, and two were hospitalized. All have recovered. Unpasteurized queso fresco apparently came from someone who made it in a private home and then delivered it to others and may have sold it on a street corner near the East Lake Street area of Minneapolis.

Anyone who may have the cheese should throw it away.

The Minnesota Department of Health, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the City of Minneapolis are investigating the outbreak and the source of the raw milk in the cheese.

Raw milk can contain pathogens that can cause serious illness, including Campylobacter, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Listeria, and Yersinia. Pasteurization has been used for almost a century as a way to reduce diseases commonly caused by raw milk.

Minnesota law allows the purchase of raw milk directly from a farm for consumption, but it may not be distributed or sold off the farm. Additionally, cheese production facilities need to follow proper food safety laws and regulations, including licensure.

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/204570561.html


----------



## haypoint

International Society for Infectious Diseases <http://www.isid.org>

Date: Wed 1 May 2013
Source: State of Alaska Epidemiology Bulletin [edited] <http://www.epi.alaska.gov/bulletins/docs/b2013_12.pdf>


_Campylobacter_ bacteria cause acute gastroenteritis, typically 2-5 days after 
exposure to contaminated food or water. Illness is usually self-limited; 
however, more severe presentations can occur, as can post-infectious sequelae 
such as reactive arthritis and Guillain-Barre syndrome (1).

On 13 Feb 2013, Alaska State Public Health Laboratory (ASPHL) notified the 
Alaska Section of Epidemiology (SOE) of a cluster of 4 _C. coli_ isolates with 
an indistinguishable pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
(PFGE) pattern that was new to Alaska. All 4 isolates were grown from stool 
specimens collected in late January 2013 from ill Kenai Peninsula residents.

Patient interviews and other investigative work indicated that all 4 of the ill 
persons with PFGE-matching _C. coli_ strains reported consuming raw 
(unpasteurized) milk within a few days of their illness onset. These initial 
interviews also led to additional case finding, primarily by way of ill persons 
reporting others they knew who were also ill with similar symptoms. While some 
of the persons who were initially identified during this investigation were 
reluctant to say where their raw milk came from, 4 individuals reported that it 
came from Farm A, a cow-share farm on the Kenai Peninsula.

A confirmed case was defined as a laboratory-confirmed, PFGE-matched, _C. coli_ 
infection diagnosed from 1 Jan 2013 onward. A clinical case was defined as an 
acute GI illness with self-reported diarrhea lasting
2 or more days in a person with exposure to Farm A raw milk within 10 days of 
illness onset. A secondary case was defined as an acute GI illness lasting 2 or 
more days in a person with close contact to a confirmed or clinical case within 
10 days of illness onset.

On 14 Feb 2013, SOE notified the Office of the State Veterinarian
(OSV) of the outbreak, and a joint press release and health advisory were issued 
on 25 Feb 2013 (2). OSV immediately notified Farm A of the outbreak and 
requested a list of all active shareholders. Despite notification of the 
outbreak, Farm A continued to distribute raw milk to shareholders living in the 
Kenai Peninsula and in Anchorage.

During the week of 18 Feb 2013, 2 additional confirmed cases were reported -- 1 
of which was in a school-aged child who was hospitalized for 4 days with fevers, 
abdominal pain, rash, and acute reactive arthritis involving the wrists, ankles, 
knees, and hips. On 22 Feb 2013, an updated health advisory describing new 
developments in the outbreak was issued (3). On 22 Feb 2013, Farm A provided SOE 
with an incomplete shareholder list, which lacked contact information for the 
majority of shareholders. Calls were made to notify persons on the list about 
the outbreak and to identify additional cases.

In total, 31 cases were identified during the investigation (Figure [for figure, 
see source URL above - Mod.LL]). Ill persons ranged in age from 7 months to 72 
years (median: 10 years). 3 children and an adult developed reactive arthritis 
lasting a minimum of 6 weeks. 2 persons were hospitalized. All ill persons were 
Kenai Peninsula residents who either personally consumed Farm A raw milk within 
10 days of illness onset (n=29) or met the secondary case definition (n=2).

On 22 Feb 2013, OSV and SOE toured Farm A and collected cow feces, milk, and 
other environmental samples. Steps where the milk could be contaminated (from 
collection to bottling) were reviewed with the farmer, and the inherent risk of 
bacterial contamination of unpasteurized milk was discussed. The outbreak strain 
of _C. coli_ was not isolated from the samples collected at the farm that day; 
however,
3 different strains of _C. jejuni_ were isolated from cow manure, and Listeria 
monocytogenes grew from a raw milk sample.

Discussion
----------
This large outbreak of _C. coli_ infection on the Kenai Peninsula was caused by 
consumption of Farm A raw milk. While this outbreak appears to be over, 
additional campylobacteriosis cases could still be identified at any time as 
_Campylobacter_ species were identified from Farm A manure during the 
environmental investigation. Furthermore, this is the 2nd outbreak of 
campylobacteriosis associated with consumption of raw milk distributed by an 
Alaskan cow-share operation in the past 2 years (4). These outbreaks are an 
unfortunate reminder of the inherent risks associated with raw milk consumption, 
and underscore the importance of pasteurization.

It is not surprising that the _C. coli_ outbreak strain was not isolated from 
the environmental samples, as _Campylobacter_ bacteria are difficult to isolate 
from the environment, they are shed intermittently in cow manure, and the farm 
visit occurred weeks after the outbreak peaked. Incidentally, _L. 
monocytogenes_, a bacteria that can cause life-threatening meningitis, was 
isolated from Farm A milk; no listeriosis cases were reported during the 
outbreak.

Finally, 4 (13 percent) ill persons developed reactive arthritis, a painful form 
of inflammatory arthritis that sometimes occurs in reaction to a bacterial 
infection and can persist for up to 12 months.
These cases underscore the fact that human campylobacteriosis can lead to 
prolonged adverse health consequences.

Recommendations
---------------
1. Health care providers should educate families about the risks of consuming 
raw dairy products. Informational materials are available at 
<http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/>.
2. Providers should obtain stool cultures in patients with acute GI illness and 
history of raw dairy consumption.
3. Providers should promptly report cases of campylobacteriosis infections to 
SOE by calling (907) 269-8000.
4. Cow/goat-share operators should maintain current and legible 
shareholder/distribution records and share these records promptly with health 
officials if an outbreak is suspected to be linked to their farm. For more 
information see <http://www.dec.state.ak.us/eh/docs/vet/Dairy/RawMilkSharesFactsheet.pdf>.


----------



## Real Hawkeye

haypoint said:


> Since all the vitamins and minerals remain after pasteurization, what's the point?


Digestive enzymes essential for complete metabolization of the milk proteins are destroyed by the pasteurization process, resulting in many who drink it suffering from asthma and hay fever as their immune systems attempt to destroy the incompletely metabolized milk proteins as they enter their bloodstream.


----------



## arabian knight

Real Hawkeye said:


> Digestive enzymes essential for complete metabolization of the milk proteins are destroyed by the pasteurization process, resulting in many who drink it suffering from asthma and hay fever as their immune systems attempt to destroy the incompletely metabolized milk proteins as they enter their bloodstream.


I think a scientific study on that statement is in order.


----------



## haypoint

Real Hawkeye said:


> Digestive enzymes essential for complete metabolization of the milk proteins are destroyed by the pasteurization process, resulting in many who drink it suffering from asthma and hay fever as their immune systems attempt to destroy the incompletely metabolized milk proteins as they enter their bloodstream.


While the point about raw milk comes at the end of this article, I wanted to include the whole thing, to avoid being blamed for "cherry picking information" I highlighted the part that relates to your belief.

The following is from an FDA information sheet regarding unpasteurized milk
(<http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/consumers/ucm079516.htm>):

Milk and milk products provide a wealth of nutrition benefits. But raw milk can 
harbor dangerous microorganisms that can pose serious health risks to you and 
your family. According to an analysis by the CDC, between 1993 and 2006 more 
than 1500 people in the USA became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese 
made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 
times more likely to cause foodborne illness and results in 13 times more 
hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Raw milk is milk from cows, sheep, or goats that has not been pasteurized to 
kill harmful bacteria. This raw, unpasteurized milk can carry dangerous bacteria 
such as _Salmonella_, _E. coli_, and _Listeria_, which are responsible for 
causing numerous foodborne illnesses.

These harmful bacteria can seriously affect the health of anyone who drinks raw 
milk, or eats foods made from raw milk. However, the bacteria in raw milk can be 
especially dangerous to people with weakened immune systems, older adults, 
pregnant women, and children.
In fact, the CDC analysis found that foodborne illness from raw milk especially 
affected children and teenagers.

"Pasteurized milk" explained
----------------------------
Pasteurization is a process that kills harmful bacteria by heating milk to a 
specific temperature for a set period of time. First developed by Louis Pasteur 
in 1864, pasteurization kills harmful organisms responsible for such diseases as 
listeriosis, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, diphtheria, and brucellosis.

Research shows no meaningful difference in the nutritional values of pasteurized 
and unpasteurized milk. Pasteurized milk contains low levels of the type of 
nonpathogenic bacteria that can cause food spoilage, so storing your pasteurized 
milk in the refrigerator is still important.

Raw milk and pasteurization: debunking milk myths
-------------------------------------------------
While pasteurization has helped provide safe, nutrient-rich milk and cheese for 
over 120 years, some people continue to believe that pasteurization harms milk 
and that raw milk is a safe healthier alternative.

Here are some common myths and *proven facts* about milk and
pasteurization:
Pasteurizing milk DOES NOT cause lactose intolerance and allergic reactions. 
*Both raw milk and pasteurized milk can cause allergic reactions in people *
*sensitive to milk proteins.*
*Raw milk DOES NOT kill dangerous pathogens by itself.*
*Pasteurization DOES NOT reduce milk's nutritional value.*
Pasteurization DOES NOT mean that it is safe to leave milk out of the 
refrigerator for extended time, particularly after it has been opened.
Pasteurization DOES kill harmful bacteria.
Pasteurization DOES save lives. -


----------



## haypoint

International Society for Infectious Diseases <http://www.isid.org>

Date: Wed 10 Apr 2013
Source: Clinical Infectious Diseases journal [edited] <http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/04/25/cid.cit231.abstract>


[This is a summary of an unpasteurized milk-associated outbreak of 
campylobacteriosism, Longenberger AH, Palumbo AJ, Chu AK, et al.
_Campylobacter jejuni_ infections associated with unpasteurized milk
-- multiple states, 2012. Clin Infect Dis. 2013; doi:
10.1093/cid/cit231. Below are selected parts of the paper:

In 2012, a multistate outbreak of campylobacter infections associated with 
unpasteurized milk resulted in 148 illnesses. A dairy with a Pennsylvania 
Department of Agriculture [PDA] unpasteurized milk permit and minimal 
deficiencies identified during inspection was the outbreak source, demonstrating the ongoing hazards of unpasteurized dairy products.

A total of 81 persons with confirmed illness were identified (70 in 
Pennsylvania, 6 in Maryland, 3 in West Virginia, and 2 in New Jersey).
All patients (except 1 with onset 3 to 4 days after other family
members) reported consuming unpasteurized milk from the dairy. An additional 67 
probable cases were identified in these 4 states (total of 148 cases). Onsets ranged from 14 Jan 2012 through 1 Feb 2012.
Among persons with confirmed illness, median age was 31 years (range:
2-74 years); 25 (31 per cent) were aged less than 18 years. 10 (12 per
cent) persons were hospitalized; severe outcomes including Guillain-Barre 
syndrome and death were not identified.

The 24 (30 per cent) _C. jejuni_ clinical isolates available for molecular 
subtyping were indistinguishable by PFGE. The dairy tested unpasteurized milk 
for _E. coli_ O157:H7 monthly; all were negative during 2012. Routine regulatory 
unpasteurized milk samples from 19 Dec
2011 and 11 Jan 2012, tested at a PDA-approved laboratory, had coliform counts 
of 28/mL and greater than 150/mL, respectively, both above the less than 10/mL regulatory limit. This prompted a warning letter from PDA; however, a sample collected on 24 Jan 2012 (before the outbreak was recognized) had a coliform count of less than 1/mL.

A total of 8 unpasteurized milk aliquots obtained during the investigation and tested at PADOH's [Pennsylvania Department of Health] laboratory and 7 aliquots tested at PDA's laboratory were negative for campylobacter. However, 2 unopened 
consumer aliquots tested at MDHMH [Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene], with best-by dates of 31 Jan 2012, yielded _C. jejuni_ with an indistinguishable PFGE pattern to all clinical isolates.


----------



## Hollowdweller

When a group of people get sick and the health dept is alerted, then they have to find out if there is a common link.

A lot of times the actual food or whatever that infected them is long gone.

Right now my wife is trying to track down what got a bunch of people sick, they are showing positive for the Shigella toxin but they have not found a common link yet.


----------



## haypoint

Hollowdweller said:


> When a group of people get sick and the health dept is alerted, then they have to find out if there is a common link.
> 
> A lot of times the actual food or whatever that infected them is long gone.
> 
> Right now my wife is trying to track down what got a bunch of people sick, they are showing positive for the Shigella toxin but they have not found a common link yet.


BINGO!

That is why the number of CONFIRMED cases of poisoning by raw milk is so much smaller than those only suspected to cause illnesses.


----------



## Wolfy-hound

Personally I believe that the people who got sick, probably did get sick from the raw milk in those cases.

But I think it should be legal to consume and sell raw milk.

Why? Because you can get sick from eating improperly cooked hamburger. But stores are allowed to sell raw hamburger, right? Same for eggs, same for chicken, pork, etc etc. 

So if 100 people get sick from contaminated spinach, we say it's an isolated case and try to make sure the supplier of the spinach cleans up their spinach, right? But if 100 people get sick from contaminated raw milk, we make it illegal to sell raw milk? How does that make sense?

Raw milk is not unhealthy. Contaminated raw milk can be unhealthy, yes? So why treat it differently from every other food product? I think people should make their own choices on what they eat. If I choose to eat raw spinach in a salad.. or drink raw milk.. or eat a taco that might have fallen on the floor but it was the last one and I had been thinking about tacos ALL DAY LONG.... ahem... then it's my choice.

Just my $0.02


----------



## DJ in WA

haypoint said:


> BINGO!
> That is why the number of CONFIRMEDcases of poisoning by raw milk is so much smaller than those only suspected to cause illnesses.


That is the case with all foodborne illness. But the number of unconfirmed illnesses is even worse with pasteurized milk, because it comes from large processing plants with wide distribution, making it more difficult to connect illnesses to the source.

This is a basic concept of epidemiology which you refuse to acknowledge, as it does not fit your agenda.

So the foods more widely distributed than raw milk tend to be blamed less when they make people sick, because its harder to attribute illness to them.
&#12288;
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497402/pdf/12297677.pdf
&#12288;


> The U.S. food supply is characterized increasingly by centralized production and wide distribution of products, and more foodborne disease outbreaks are dispersed over broad geographic areas. Such outbreaks may present as a gradual, diffuse, and initially unapparent increase in sporadic cases.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> That is the case with all foodborne illness. But the number of unconfirmed illnesses is even worse with pasteurized milk, because it comes from large processing plants with wide distribution, making it more difficult to connect illnesses to the source.
> 
> This is a basic concept of epidemiology which you refuse to acknowledge, as it does not fit your agenda.
> 
> So the foods more widely distributed than raw milk tend to be blamed less when they make people sick, because its harder to attribute illness to them.
> &#12288;
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497402/pdf/12297677.pdf
> &#12288;


 "Large processing plants with wide distribution" will effect a large group of people greatly increasing the opportunity to pinpoint the source back to the processing plant. Because it could potentially effect so many people, large processing plants are carefully monitored and milk borne illnesses from such large processing plants is very rare. Generally it is from contaminated containers and more rarely a failure to properly pasteurize. 

If there was a bacteria that came from one farm, mixed with the milk from a hundred farms and was resistant to the pasteurization process, then your view on the dangers of products comingled would have some merit. However since each container of processed milk is marked, allowing trace back to the processing facility and there are records to indicate the group of farms that contributed milk to that batch, trace back to the infected farm would be completed in a matter of days.

Most widely distributed foods are coded with lot numbers and dates. From this there is good access to the source of the contamination. 

I understand what you are saying. If I sold 100 pounds of tainted spinach that was distributed over 10 different states, my produce wouldn't be as likely to come under investigation as a person that sold 100 pounds of tainted spinach from a single location. But small quantities of pasteurized milk are not widely distributed.
I contend that a large quantity of widely distributed contaminated pasteurized milk will attract more attention than a small quantity of locally distributed contaminated raw milk.


----------



## haypoint

While I had intended this thread as a place to post each case of raw milk related illnesses as they are reported, a fellow homesteader took exception to the Alaskan raw milk outbreak. So, here is more than most want to know as the authorities pinned down the source as being from that single dairy, not someone's undercooked pot roast or shell fish. There is now proof that it was the raw milk, again.

"Date: Thu 23 May 2013
Source: Alaska Section of Epidemiology [edited] <http://www.epi.hss.state.ak.us/phan/AKPHAN_20130523_CampyOutbreakRawMilk.pdf>


The purpose of this Health Advisory is to inform Alaska health care providers of 
a new and potentially ongoing outbreak of _Campylobacter jejuni_ infections 
associated with consumption of raw milk distributed by a Kenai Peninsula 
cow-share program. This is the same Kenai Peninsula cow-share program that was 
linked to the _Campylobacter coli_ outbreak that sickened at least 31 people 
earlier in 2013.

On 22 May 2013, the Alaska State Public Health Laboratory notified the Alaska 
Section of Epidemiology (SOE) of 2 _C. jejuni_ isolates with an 
indistinguishable pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pattern.
These 2 isolates came from stool samples of 2 unrelated persons living on the 
Kenai Peninsula. Both persons indicated that their diarrheal illness started 
within 10 days after consuming raw milk from the same Kenai Peninsula cow-share 
farm (Farm A). Nationally, this PFGE pattern has only been seen once before, 
from a _C. jejuni_ isolate obtained from cow manure collected on Farm A in 
February 2013 (see:
<http://www.epi.alaska.gov/bulletins/docs/b2013_12.pdf>). In addition to the 2 
laboratory-confirmed cases, 3 other persons have also been identified as having 
developed acute diarrheal illness within 10 days after consuming Farm A raw 
milk. These individuals did not seek medical attention.

_Campylobacter_ are bacteria that can cause diarrhea (sometimes bloody), 
abdominal cramping/pain, nausea, vomiting, and fever within 2 to 5 days after 
exposure. The illness typically lasts about a week.
Sometimes campylobacteriosis infections can lead to more serious health 
consequences, including reactive arthritis (as occurred in several cases during 
the February 2013 _C. coli_ outbreak), and Guillain-Barre syndrome. In persons 
with compromised immune systems, the bacterium occasionally spread to the 
bloodstream and cause a serious life-threatening infection.

Sources of campylobacter include undercooked meat or cross-contamination of 
other foods by raw meat or by feces from an infected animal. Outbreaks are often 
associated with consumption of unpasteurized milk or contaminated water. Animals 
can also be infected, and some people have acquired their infection from contact 
with the stool of an infected or colonized animal. The organism does not 
commonly spread from person-to-person, but this can happen if the infected 
person is producing a large volume of diarrhea."


----------



## haypoint

<http://www.sys-con.com/node/2678149>


The Pennsylvania Departments of Agriculture and Health today, 29 May 2013, 
advised consumers to discard raw milk produced by The Family Cow in 
Chambersburg, Franklin County, because of potential bacterial contamination. 
Agriculture and Health Department laboratory tests and several recent illnesses 
indicate the raw milk may contain campylobacter bacteria.

The Department of Health has confirmed 5 cases of confirmed campylobacteriosis 
in people who consumed milk from the farm at 3854 Olde Scotland Road. Based on 
the reported illnesses, the Department of Agriculture collected samples of raw 
milk during an investigation of The Family Cow, on 17 May 2013. Positive tests 
for campylobacter were confirmed on Tue 28 May 2013.

The packaged raw milk is sold under The Family Cow label in plastic gallon, 
half-gallon, quart, and pint containers. It is labeled as "raw milk". Raw milk 
is milk that has not been pasteurized.

The Family Cow sells directly to consumers in an on-farm retail store and at 
drop off locations and retail stores around Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and the 
Lehigh Valley, as well as south-central Pennsylvania. Agriculture officials 
ordered the owners of the farm to stop the sale of all raw milk until further 
notice.

Nearly 1300 confirmed cases of campylobacter [infection] are reported each year 
in Pennsylvania.


----------



## DJ in WA

haypoint said:


> "Large processing plants with wide distribution" will effect a large group of people greatly increasing the opportunity to pinpoint the source back to the processing plant. Because it could potentially effect so many people, large processing plants are carefully monitored and milk borne illnesses from such large processing plants is very rare. Generally it is from contaminated containers and more rarely a failure to properly pasteurize.
> If there was a bacteria that came from one farm, mixed with the milk from a hundred farms and was resistant to the pasteurization process, then your view on the dangers of products comingled would have some merit. However since each container of processed milk is marked, allowing trace back to the processing facility and there are records to indicate the group of farms that contributed milk to that batch, trace back to the infected farm would be completed in a matter of days.
> Most widely distributed foods are coded with lot numbers and dates. From this there is good access to the source of the contamination.
> I understand what you are saying. If I sold 100 pounds of tainted spinach that was distributed over 10 different states, my produce wouldn't be as likely to come under investigation as a person that sold 100 pounds of tainted spinach from a single location. But small quantities of pasteurized milk are not widely distributed.
> *I contend that a large quantity of widely distributed contaminated pasteurized milk will attract more attention than a small quantity of locally distributed contaminated raw milk*.


I realize with your limited understanding of epidemiology and disease outbreak investigation, you might want to disagree with the public health officials, but let me try to illustrate.

Suppose contaminated pasteurized milk caused 1000 illnesses, one in each of 1000 towns. Each of those towns wouldn't consider one illness an outbreak, especially if the illness was not severe. They wouldn't necessarily do an investigation, so lot numbers would be irrelevant. And if they did investigate, with only one illness, how would you statistically determine which food the person consumed was the cause of illness? You have to have several sick and not sick people that ate various foods in order to determine which food caused illness. Not to mention the bias of investigators assuming pasteurized milk cannot make people sick.

In addition, the processing plant could be a few states away, so harder to attribute illness to it.

On the other hand, if contaminated raw milk with only local distribution makes ten people sick in one town, it would be easier to notice an outbreak, because you don't normally have ten people sick in one place. And it is easier to attribute it to a local farm. And of course, investigators would take much more interest in raw milk if they knew someone was drinking it.

Now I would say that raw milk from cows with high grain diets and filthy, crowded conditions as with most conventional dairies, would cause more illness. But the attention is probably in higher proportions than that given to the illnesses caused by pasteurized milk or other products.


----------



## haypoint

Date: Tue 25 Jun 2013
Source: Minnesota Department of Health [edited] <http://www.health.state.mn.us/news/pressrel/2013/rawmilk062513.html>


Minnesota state health and agriculture officials reported today, 25 Jun 2013, 
that routine disease surveillance has detected at least 6 illnesses linked to 
consumption of raw dairy products from the Dennis Jaloszynski dairy farm, near 
Cambridge, Minnesota. According to epidemiologists with the Minnesota Department 
of Health (MDH), the illnesses include 3 people with laboratory confirmation of 
a bacterium called _Campylobacter jejuni_. The illnesses were reported to MDH by 
health care providers as required under Minnesota law. When MDH contacted the 
individuals to inquire about potential causes of their illnesses, the ill people 
reported that they had consumed raw milk from the Jaloszynski Farm.

Minnesota Department of Agriculture inspectors visited the farm to determine how 
many customers were purchasing the milk to notify them of the outbreak. Because 
the owner did not have a customer list, a consumer advisory is being issued. 
Anyone who may have purchased or received raw milk from this farm should not 
drink it but should throw it away.

"We're concerned that people may be continuing to get sick after consuming 
products from this farm," said Trisha Robinson, a foodborne illness 
epidemiologist with MDH.

"While we are very concerned about the illnesses associated with this farm, this 
also is about the inherent risk for foodborne illness from any raw milk 
consumption," Robinson said. "Drinking raw milk or eating products made from raw 
milk can expose you to a variety of pathogens that can result in anything from a 
few days of diarrhea to kidney failure and death. People need to think carefully 
about those risks before consuming raw dairy products from any source, and 
people need to know that the risks are especially high for young children."

Common symptoms of campylobacteriosis include fever, diarrhea (sometimes 
bloody), abdominal pain, malaise, and vomiting. Symptoms often begin 2-5 days 
after consumption of contaminated food. Symptoms last for about a week in most 
people but can last for up to 3 weeks in
20 percent of cases. In addition, the infection occasionally results in 
complications such as arthritis and Guillain Barre syndrome, which is 
characterized by sudden onset of paralysis

[The following is from an FDA information sheet regarding unpasteurized milk
(<http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/consumers/ucm079516.htm>):

Milk and milk products provide a wealth of nutrition benefits. But raw milk can 
harbor dangerous microorganisms that can pose serious health risks to you and 
your family. According to an analysis by the CDC, between 1993 and 2006 more 
than 1500 people in the USA became sick from drinking raw milk or eating cheese 
made from raw milk. In addition, CDC reported that unpasteurized milk is 150 
times more likely to cause foodborne illness and results in 13 times more 
hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.

Raw milk is milk from cows, sheep, or goats that has not been pasteurized to 
kill harmful bacteria. This raw, unpasteurized milk can carry dangerous bacteria 
such as _Salmonella_, _E. coli_, and _Listeria_, which are responsible for 
causing numerous foodborne illnesses.

These harmful bacteria can seriously affect the health of anyone who drinks raw 
milk, or eats foods made from raw milk. However, the bacteria in raw milk can be 
especially dangerous to people with weakened immune systems, older adults, 
pregnant women, and children.
In fact, the CDC analysis found that foodborne illness from raw milk especially 
affected children and teenagers.

"Pasteurized milk" explained
----------------------------
Pasteurization is a process that kills harmful bacteria by heating milk to a 
specific temperature for a set period of time. First developed by Louis Pasteur 
in 1864, pasteurization kills harmful organisms responsible for such diseases as 
listeriosis, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, diphtheria, and brucellosis.

Research shows no meaningful difference in the nutritional values of pasteurized 
and unpasteurized milk. Pasteurized milk contains low levels of the type of 
nonpathogenic bacteria that can cause food spoilage, so storing your pasteurized 
milk in the refrigerator is still important.

Raw milk and pasteurization: debunking milk myths
-------------------------------------------------
While pasteurization has helped provide safe, nutrient-rich milk and cheese for 
over 120 years, some people continue to believe that pasteurization harms milk 
and that raw milk is a safe, healthier alternative.

Here are some common myths and proven facts about milk and
pasteurization:
Pasteurizing milk DOES NOT cause lactose intolerance and allergic reactions. 
Both raw milk and pasteurized milk can cause allergic reactions in people 
sensitive to milk proteins.
Raw milk DOES NOT kill dangerous pathogens by itself.
Pasteurization DOES NOT reduce milk's nutritional value.
Pasteurization DOES NOT mean that it is safe to leave milk out of the 
refrigerator for extended time, particularly after it has been opened.
Pasteurization DOES kill harmful bacteria.
Pasteurization DOES save lives.


----------



## Lazaryss

Yes yes, we know how you feel Haypoint...


----------



## Cannon_Farms

even the wall street journal just posted an article on the safety of raw milk. More people get sick off city tap water containing the same bacteria's as what is said can be found in raw milk, look at the CDC if you want hard numbers. One experiment that has been done several times take 4 jars fill two up with pasteurized milk and the other two with raw milk put one of each in the fridge and counter and open them in a week and see which one seems the worst to you. I wont drink it but we have had small jars with excess raw milk get pushed to the back of the fridge and not seen again for weeks (lots of kids lots of food in fridge) and then found the milk will still smell just fine and my husband says it still taste good but um, no I am not that brave. Would I drink raw milk from a dairy, no, from a cow, probably not but with my goats they are very well cleaned before milking and our milk for consumption is always done by hand.


----------



## arabian knight

Doesn't hurt to get the truth out once in awhile for those that might not have been inclined to look at "The Other Side" of things.


----------



## kasilofhome

Personally this is almost the equal of evalgelizing. Look I have faith my milk source.


----------



## Appalachia

Been missing your uplifting posts around here haypoint......


----------



## haypoint

Knox County (Tennessee) Health Department (KCHD) collected raw milk samples and 
a customer list from a Mascot farm Thursday, 31 Oct 2013, after 3 children were 
hospitalized with _E. coli_ bacterial infections. All 3 children had consumed 
raw milk from McBee Dairy Farm on Strong Road. Specimens have been sent to the 
state Department of Health laboratory for testing, KCHD spokeswoman Katharine 
Killen said Friday, 1 Nov 2013.

"No milk has been destroyed," Killen said, though a legal order prevents the 
farm from selling raw cow or goat milk while the investigation is active.

Tennesseans can legally drink raw milk from cows they own. Several families own 
"shares" of cows on the dairy farm. The owner told a local television station 
she is advising customers not to drink any raw milk they might have until the 
investigation is complete. Children are more likely than adults to develop 
symptoms of _E. coli_ which can include severe stomach cramps and stomach 
tenderness; nausea and vomiting; or watery or bloody diarrhea.

--


[In the March 2012 issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases (Langer AJ, Ayers T, 
Grass J, et al: Nonpasteurized dairy products, disease outbreaks, and state laws 
-- United States, 1993-2006. Emerg Infect Dis 2012; 18(3): 385-91 
<http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/11-1370_article.htm>), the authors report 
on 121 foodborne outbreaks (with 4413 cases of reported
illness) caused by contaminated dairy products, and 73 (60 percent) were 
involved with unpasteurized dairy products; 65 (54 percent) involved cheese, 42 
percent made from unpasteurized milk, and 56 involved fluid milk, 82 percent 
involved unpasteurized milk. In these outbreaks, _Campylobacter_ was responsible 
for 54 percent of the outbreaks, following by _Salmonella_ spp (22 percent), 
enterohemorrhagic _E. coli_ (13 percent), _Brucella_ spp (4 percent), _Listeria_ 
spp (4 percent), and _Shigella_ spp (3 percent).

A recently published paper (Claeys WL, Cardoen S, Daube G, et al: Raw or heated 
cow milk consumption: Review of risks and benefits. Food Control 2013; 31(1): 
251-62) is available at <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.035>. It 
addresses the arguments that pasteurization removes significant nutrients from 
milk.

The abstract, introduction, and conclusions are given below with the citations 
removed.

"Abstract
---------
In the context of the prevailing trend toward more natural products, there seems 
to be an increasing preference for raw milk consumption as raw milk is 
associated with several perceived health benefits that are believed to be 
destroyed upon heating. However, many human pathogens can be isolated from raw 
cow milk. The prevalence of foodborne pathogens in raw cow milk varies, but 
their presence has been demonstrated in many surveys and foodborne infections 
have been repeatedly reported for _Campylobacter_, _Salmonella_ spp. and human 
pathogenic verocytotoxin-producing _Escherichia coli_ [VTEC]. In industrialized 
countries, milk-borne and milk product-borne outbreaks represent 2-6 percent of 
the bacterial foodborne outbreaks.

The aim of this review is to present scientifically sound data regarding the 
risks and benefits related to the consumption of raw and heated cow milk. Both 
microbiological aspects (such as the prevalence of milk-borne pathogens, 
pathogen growth inhibition by antimicrobial systems and by lactic acid producing 
bacteria, probiotic bacteria,
etc.) and nutritional or health aspects (nutritional value, immunity, allergies, 
lactose intolerance, diabetes, milk digestibility, etc.) are considered.

As such, it is demonstrated that consumption of raw milk poses a realistic 
health threat due to a possible contamination with human pathogens. It is 
therefore strongly recommended that milk should be heated before consumption. 
With the exception of an altered organoleptic profile [taste], heating (in 
particular ultra high temperature and similar treatments) will not substantially 
change the nutritional value of raw milk or other benefits associated with raw 
milk consumption.

Introduction
------------
The consumption of raw milk is not well-documented, but in the context of the 
current trend toward 'consuming natural' and 'purchasing locally,' raw milk 
consumption is becoming more popular. This is nourished by the perception that 
heating destroys the nutritional and health benefits of milk, and can even 
induce some detrimental effects.
However, due to its high nutritional value together with the neutral pH and high 
water activity [content?], raw milk serves as an excellent growth medium for 
different micro-organisms, whose multiplication depends mainly on temperature 
and on competing micro-organisms and their metabolic products. In order to 
guarantee its microbial safety and to prolong its shelf-life, milk is heat 
treated.

The impact of milk pasteurization on public health can be clearly illustrated by 
means of historical data. Before 1938, an estimated 25 percent of all foodborne 
and waterborne disease outbreaks in the USA were associated with milk, whereas 
nowadays, the percentage of such outbreaks associated with milk is estimated to 
be below 1 percent.
Between 1880 and 1907, 29 milk-borne outbreaks were reported on average each 
year in the USA. With the adoption of pasteurization in 1938, milk-borne 
diseases dropped to only 46 outbreaks during the 19-year period from 1973 to 
1992, corresponding to an average of 2.4 outbreaks each year. A recent report of 
the USA CDC indicates that the vast majority of milk-borne outbreaks in the USA 
are in states that permit the sale of raw milk. In England and Wales, the great 
majority of milk-borne outbreaks during the 1980s were attributed to the 
consumption of raw milk. In Scotland, a similar situation existed until the sale 
of unpasteurized milk was prohibited in 1983, which led to a significant drop of 
the incidence of diseases related to liquid milk consumption. 

In the mid-20th century, the main illnesses associated with raw milk consumption 
were brucellosis and tuberculosis. These have been eradicated as milk-borne 
diseases in developed countries, mainly through herd certification programs 
which included culling of infected animals, the installation of refrigerated 
bulk tanks for milk collection on farms, and the introduction of pasteurization. 
In the past, pasteurization conditions were standardized based on the 
destruction of _Mycobacterium bovis_, a relatively heat-resistant non-sporogenic 
bacterium that formerly was among the most serious pathogenic bacteria present 
in milk. Pasteurization standards today are based upon the destruction of 
_Coxiella burnetii_ the most heat-resistant milk-borne zoonotic pathogen known. 
In the past 30 years, several previously unrecognized foodborne bacterial 
infections, including infection with _Campylobacter jejuni_, _Listeria 
monocytogenes_, and _Escherichia coli_ strain O157 (or more general 
verocytotoxin-producing pathogenic _E. coli_ [VTEC]), have emerged as 
significant causes of human morbidity and mortality. Pathogens mainly present in 
raw milk today are, among others, _C. jejuni_, _Salmonella_ spp., 
_Staphylococcus aureus_, _Listeria monocytogenes_, pathogenic _E. coli_ and 
_Yersinia enterocolitica_.

In Europe, the current regulatory microbial criteria for raw cow milk are less 
than or equal to 100 000 colony forming units (cfu)/ml for plate count (at 30 
deg C/86 deg F) and less than or equal to 400 000 cfu/ml for somatic cells, as 
is stipulated in Regulation (EC) 853/2004 laying down specific hygiene rules on 
the hygiene of foodstuffs. In this Regulation, health requirements for 
production animals and hygienic requirements on milk production holdings (such 
as regarding premises and equipment, hygiene during milking, collection, and 
transport, staff hygiene) are established as well. In general, raw milk intended 
for human consumption must meet the requirements of the General Food Law 
(Regulation (EC) 178/2002) and be free of pathogens.
Even though improvements in hygiene resulted in routine production of raw cow 
milk with less than 20 000 cfu (total flora)/ml), this does not guarantee raw 
milk to be free of pathogens. In approximately 1-6 percent of the human 
outbreaks reported in developed countries, milk has been identified as the 
vehicle of infection. An overview of foodborne disease reports from different 
industrialized countries indicates that milk and milk products are implicated in 
1-5 percent of the total bacterial foodborne outbreaks, with 39.1 percent 
attributed to milk, 53.1 percent to cheese, and 7.8 percent to other milk 
products.

Whereas milk quality and safety has been the topic of many research studies, raw 
milk still continues to be an issue for debate, which is primarily held on the 
internet where often non-scientifically based information circulates. Therefore, 
the aim of this study is to evaluate the risks and benefits related to the 
consumption of raw cow milk at one hand, and to evaluate the effect of heat 
treatments of milk on these risks and benefits on the other hand, considering 
the microbiological as well as the nutritional (health) aspects.

Conclusions
-----------
In this evaluation it is clearly demonstrated that the consumption of raw milk 
poses a realistic and unnecessary health threat because of its possible 
contamination with pathogenic bacteria. It is therefore recommended to heat 
[raw] milk before consumption, especially when served to young children, 
pregnant women, or any person suffering from a chronic disease or a suppressed 
immune system. In this context the attention is drawn to raw milk provided on 
farms to the general public (such as during a school visit) and raw milk 
distributors allowing the automatic supply of raw milk from a bulk reservoir to 
the consumer.

Historical data show that the pasteurization of milk has led to improved public 
health and more recent data on occasional raw milk consumption indicate the 
hazard of bacterial infections, which could be avoided by a heat treatment. At 
present, thermal treatment remains the most frequently used and most effective 
method to increase the microbiological safety of milk without substantially 
changing the nutritional value of milk or other benefits associated with raw 
milk consumption. Table 4 [see original URL above] summarizes the main
(claimed) benefits of raw milk consumption and the (claimed) detrimental effects 
of heating discussed in the present paper. Almost all arguments put forward by 
raw milk proponents for not heating milk, can be refuted, and the only 
substantial disadvantage of heating is the change in the organoleptic profile 
[taste] of milk. It is clear that this 'detrimental' effect of heating does not 
countervail the risk posed by raw milk consumption, namely of a milk-borne 
pathogen infection, which can have serious health consequences."


----------



## haypoint

Date: Tue 17 Sep 2013
Source: Vancouver Sun [edited]
<http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Deadly+coli+outbreak+linked+gouda+cheese/8924611/story.html>


The BC [British Columbia] Centre for Disease Control [BCCDC] has issued a public 
health alert asking people to avoid eating Gort's Gouda brand of raw-milk 
cheeses after an _E. coli_ outbreak has been linked to a death in the Interior 
and illness in 14 others across BC and Alberta. The Canadian Food Inspection 
Agency has recalled all types of cheese -- including various Goudas, Maasdammer, 
Parmesan, Mazouda, and Beaufort -- from the artisanal Salmon Arm facility.

The 1st BC case was recorded in July 2013 and a death occurred in August 2013, 
but it wasn't until a "cluster" of several cases were confirmed in late August 
2013 that the center started investigating the possibility of an outbreak. "We 
couldn't pick (the _E. coli_
problem) up in July or early August 2013 because the number of people infected 
was very low," said Dr Eleni Galanis, an epidemiologist with the BCCDC.

The outbreak of _E. coli_ serotype O157 was eventually linked to Gort's Gouda 
Cheese Farm, which espouses traditional cheese making using raw milk. In an FAQ 
section on its website, the company says its cheese is made from unpasteurized 
milk and stored on the shelf for a minimum of 2 months. "The time that it sits 
on the shelf, allows harmful pathogenic bacteria to die off," the site states.

So far 3 people have been hospitalized, including the person who died, according 
to Dr Rob Parker, Medical Health Officer for the Interior Health Authority. 
Parker said the person who died was admitted to the hospital after showing 
symptoms of an _E. coli_ infection.

The company stopped selling all of its cheeses last Sat 14 Sep 2013, but is 
still able to sell other dairy products like milk, according to Galanis. "At 
this point what we're telling BC residents is to avoid eating any cheese from 
Gort's Gouda Cheese Farm and to discard it,"
Galanis said. Anyone who has eaten Gort's cheese in the past 10 days and has had 
severe diarrhea or feels very sick should see a doctor, Galanis added.

A Gort's representative was unavailable for comment Tue 17 Sep 2013.
But, Kathy Wikkerink, whose family bought the operation in August 2007, 
responded online to concerns from customers who began posting on the company's 
Facebook page Tuesday afternoon. "_E. coli_ has been linked to our raw milk 
cheese," the user named Kathy Wikkerink posted.
"They have yet to determine where this came from."

In May 2012, the company had its heavy cream recalled by the CFIA [Canadian Food 
Inspection Agency] due to a microbiological issue.


----------



## haypoint

Date: Thu 29 Aug 2013
Source: CDC. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2013; 62(34);702-702 [edited] 
<http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6234a4.htm?s_cid=mm6234a4_w>


During May 2013, the Pennsylvania Department of Health investigated an outbreak 
of campylobacteriosis among consumers of raw (unpasteurized) milk from a dairy 
certified by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) to sell raw milk 
onsite, at retail stores, and at off-farm pick-up sites.

Investigation by the Pennsylvania Department of Health and PDA identified 6 
confirmed and 2 probable cases of campylobacteriosis associated with raw milk 
from the dairy. A confirmed case was defined as laboratory-confirmed 
campylobacteriosis in a person who drank the dairy's raw milk. A probable case 
was defined as diarrheal illness without laboratory confirmation in a person who 
had consumed the dairy's raw milk and was linked to a confirmed case; 4 cases 
involved children aged 18 years or less. PDA identified _Campylobacter_ in bulk 
tank and retail milk samples from the dairy. Available isolates from patient 
stool (n = 1), bulk tank milk (n = 1), and retail milk (n = 1) were identified 
by CDC as _Campylobacter jejuni_ and were indistinguishable by pulsed-field gel 
electrophoresis (PFGE).

Although the dairy has consistently adhered to PDA requirements for raw milk 
dairies and conducted milk coliform and somatic cell testing more frequently 
than required, this was not the 1st outbreak associated with this dairy. During 
January-February 2012, the dairy was identified as the source of a multistate 
outbreak of campylobacteriosis (1). That outbreak was the largest raw 
milk-associated outbreak in Pennsylvania in the past 2 decades, with
148 associated cases identified. PFGE patterns from the _C. jejuni_ strains 
isolated during the 2012 and 2013 outbreaks differed, consistent with the 
diversity of _C. jejuni_ isolated from cattle on dairy farms (2). PDA also 
identified _Campylobacter_ in bulk tank milk obtained from the dairy during 
January 2011; no associated human infections were reported.

Repeat outbreaks from raw milk producers are not uncommon and not limited to 
_Campylobacter_. During 2005-2013, Pennsylvania experienced
17 salmonellosis and campylobacteriosis outbreaks associated with retail raw 
milk; 5 producers had more than one outbreak during that period. Bacterial 
contamination of raw milk can occur even under optimal conditions; seasonal 
changes in bovine bacterial shedding or inadequate quality control during milk 
collection might contribute to outbreak recurrence (2). Findings here and 
elsewhere indicate that compliance with state regulations and increased producer 
awareness after an outbreak are insufficient to prevent future outbreaks (3).
Public health officials should be vigilant for outbreaks from previously 
implicated dairies, and public education should stress that avoiding consumption 
is the most effective way to prevent illness from raw milk products.


----------



## haypoint

Date: Thu 21 Nov 2013
Source: The Tennessean [edited]
<http://www.tennessean.com/article/2...k-raw-milk-from-Tennessee-farm?nclick_check=1>


Tennessee Health Department officials have tracked cases of _E. coli_ found in 9 
children back to a Knox County raw milk dairy. The health department announced 
today [21 Nov 2013] that bacterial strains in the milk matched strains found in 
feces at the dairy.

"This outbreak points out, again, the serious risks associated with drinking 
unpasteurized or 'raw' milk," health commissioner John Dreyzehner said in a 
statement. "While people with stronger immune systems may be able to overcome 
the bacteria found in raw milk, children, older people, pregnant women, and 
those with health conditions can be seriously harmed by bacteria in 
non-pasteurized milk products and should not consume them."

The milk came from McBee Dairy Farm in Mascot, Tennessee, which officials shut 
down for testing after the outbreak. It reopened earlier this month [November 
2013]. As part of the agreement that allowed it to reopen, McBee Dairy Farm will 
work with a University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Office food safety 
expert.

Three of the 9 children became seriously ill, but all recovered.

Raw milk goes from cow to consumer without pasteurization and is legal for 
personal use in Tennessee, although it can't be sold except as pet food. 
Advocates say that lack of pasteurization makes it better for people with milk 
allergies or who want to cultivate raw milk's "good"
bacteria to aid digestion.


----------



## Lazydaisy67

While I can certainly appreciate the time and effort you have taken to post articles and express your concerns about the dangers of drinking raw milk I am equally thankful that you are not in charge of raising my children. More people die in car accidents every year and yet I put my children in a car almost every day. Sure, I buckle them in, but none the less, people die in cars. People also die from gunshot wounds every day in this country, but up until now at least, efforts to take those dangerous guns away from people has failed to curb the problem. 
This is not a food borne illness issue, this is a freedom of choice issue. You chose to drink some milk, it made you sick and now you have the freedom to choose NOT to drink it anymore. I'm very glad you had those choices and will continue to defend your right to not only make them, but to tell others about them.


----------



## HDRider

Haypoint I am very curious why you are so active in anti-raw milk and from-the-farm milk?

Do you lose a loved one to bad milk? What drives you so hard on this issue?


----------



## Wanda

He posted on this thread Dec. 02 of last year why is there a need to chastise the poster today?:shrug:


----------



## HDRider

Wanda said:


> He posted on this thread Dec. 02 of last year why is there a need to chastise the poster today?:shrug:


You talking to me? If so, I am not chastising. If not, never mind.


----------



## greg273

I think we get your conclusions haypoint... Raw milk bad, anything that Monsanto, Novartis, Bayer, or DuPont puts out, Good. :grin:


----------



## CraterCove

It's been a continuing thread, really. But this is a personal choice issue. I drink raw milk straight from my goats, whose hygiene and health I know. Would I drink raw milk from an unknown source? No way. Would i serve raw milk to a guest? No, too much liability and they likely aren't well enough educated on the risks to make an informed decision. 

Also, if I get pregnant again I will pasteurize my milk for my consumption-- it's why we put seat belts on when we drive in cars, because to not do so is too dangerous in my opinion to take a risk.


----------



## arabian knight

HDRider said:


> Haypoint I am very curious why you are so active in anti-raw milk and from-the-farm milk?
> 
> Do you lose a loved one to bad milk? What drives you so hard on this issue?


He just wants to get the other side of things out. There is so much Misinformation about pasteurization milk, and how it is not good and such why have those lies keep going just because some on the net keep going back and making old stories that have been debunked seem new, when in fact they are not, just being regurgitated time and again as if something new has taken place. SO much misinformation, and misguided things going on someone HAS to ket at the truth from the Other side of things.


----------



## haypoint

arabian knight said:


> He just wants to get the other side of things out. There is so much Misinformation about pasteurization milk, and how it is not good and such why have those lies keep going just because some on the net keep going back and making old stories that have been debunked seem new, when in fact they are not, just being regurgitated time and again as if something new has taken place. SO much misinformation, and misguided things going on someone HAS to ket at the truth from the Other side of things.


I don't have an axe to grind over raw milk. I am in favor of people that know the risks and drink their own. Selling it or buying it sets up a whole new set of problems. But the topic of safety and superior nutritional value are often misrepresented. I offer up facts that you can do with as you like. 
There are a few topics that are chock full of half truths and outright lies. If we, the homesteading today community are going to succeed, we need to look beyond our own gardens. We need to make educated, informed choices. 
If you are told that glyphosate poisons the soil and gets into plants, I want you to know the truth. That often puts me on the side of defending it. To some, that makes me a stooge for Monsanto. I just want you to drop the nonsense and understand the facts. 
I see a lot of lies over RFID. But, in Michigan, I have seen it help all cattle and dairy farms, large and small. But when I refute the fear mongrels, some think I'm pro-big brother.
Please don't be too quick to judge. I've been doing this back to the land thing for longer than many of you have been alive. Much of it was done without Google or a wonderful resource like Homesteadingtoday. I've learned a lot, experienced much and will always seek more knowledge. If you are unwilling to evaluate other viewpoints, I guess I don't understand the meaning of discussion.


----------



## haypoint

*http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/02/a-mom-and-a-dairymans-plea-dont-feed-children-raw-milk/#.UwPpnXKYZjo*
*&#8220;A Mom and a Dairyman Plead: Don&#8217;t Feed Children Raw Milk *
*Kylee Young was a healthy two-year-old when she contracted an E. coli infection from drinking raw milk, an illness that caused a stroke and culminated in a kidney transplanted from her mom.&#8221;*
*This is how the report starts out, farther into the report:*
&#8220;Like most mothers, Jill Brown wanted to feed her family the best food possible. For her, that meant growing a garden, buying as much food as she could from local farmers, and eventually buying raw milk for her toddler, who was an avid milk drinker.
Her quest to find raw milk was in large part triggered by her desire to steer clear of &#8220;industrial agriculture&#8221; and buy from a local farm instead. She saw it as a good fit with the philosophy of the &#8220;local food movement,&#8221; which her family and many of their friends embrace.
&#8220;I wanted to know where the milk I was buying was coming from,&#8221; she said. &#8220;My research led me to believe that raw milk from a local farm would be healthier than the milk I bought at the store.&#8221;


----------



## sidepasser

Well there are recalls of regular milk products such as these:

(_Reuters) - Fonterra, the world's largest dairy exporter, came under fire from the New Zealand government, farmers and financial regulators for its handling of a food contamination scare that has triggered product recalls and spooked parents from China to Saudi Arabia._

_The government sent officials to Fonterra premises to ensure a clearer message and to regain international confidence after New Zealand's biggest company was criticized for dragging its feet in saying it sold whey protein products that contained a bacteria that could cause botulism - a potentially fatal food poisoning._
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-newzealand-milk-idUSBRE97509120130806

and here is a whole slew of milk recalls all in one easy place to read:

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/tag/milk/#.UwP_T2JdUmU

P_rice Chopper Recalls Milk Over Cleaning Solution
BY NEWS DESK | SEPTEMBER 18, 2013
spilledmilk_406x250
Grocery retailer Price Chopper is recalling homogenized milk in half-gallon paper cartons because the milk may contain a non-hazardous cleaning solution. The recalled product bears the UPC code 4173513275 and a best-by date of Sept. 29. The cleaning solution was used to clean processing equipment and the retailer says it is not harmful to humans&#8230;.

WA Dairy Recalls Improperly Pasteurized Products
BY COOKSON BEECHER | MAY 14, 2013
open-milk-bottles-406
A Washington state dairy is voluntarily recalling certain milk and cream products because they were not adequately pasteurized. Pure Eire Dairy of Othello, WA issued a recall of its organic pasteurized non-homogenized skim, reduced fat 2% milk, and whole and heavy cream milk products bearing the expiration dates of 5/15/13, 5/18/13 and 5/20/13 Monday. The recall&#8230;
_

I figure if one is old enough to buy and pay for whatever they wish to drink, eat, wear, drive, or listen to - watch - etc. - it's on them. _Life has no guarantees_ and personally, life is a bit more fun when spent not worrying so much over what other folks are doing. I have enough to do without worrying about whether my neighbor is drinking milk - no matter what type.


----------



## DJ in WA

Safest thing is to avoid all animal products, and anything that could be contaminated by animals.

Mountain Dew and beer are extremely safe.


----------



## haypoint

sidepasser said:


> Well there are recalls of regular milk products such as these:
> 
> (_Reuters) - Fonterra, the world's largest dairy exporter, came under fire from the New Zealand government, farmers and financial regulators for its handling of a food contamination scare that has triggered product recalls and spooked parents from China to Saudi Arabia._
> 
> _The government sent officials to Fonterra premises to ensure a clearer message and to regain international confidence after New Zealand's biggest company was criticized for dragging its feet in saying it sold whey protein products that contained a bacteria that could cause botulism - a potentially fatal food poisoning._
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-newzealand-milk-idUSBRE97509120130806
> 
> and here is a whole slew of milk recalls all in one easy place to read:
> 
> http://www.foodsafetynews.com/tag/milk/#.UwP_T2JdUmU
> 
> P_rice Chopper Recalls Milk Over Cleaning Solution
> BY NEWS DESK | SEPTEMBER 18, 2013
> spilledmilk_406x250
> Grocery retailer Price Chopper is recalling homogenized milk in half-gallon paper cartons because the milk may contain a non-hazardous cleaning solution. The recalled product bears the UPC code 4173513275 and a best-by date of Sept. 29. The cleaning solution was used to clean processing equipment and the retailer says it is not harmful to humansâ¦.
> 
> WA Dairy Recalls Improperly Pasteurized Products
> BY COOKSON BEECHER | MAY 14, 2013
> open-milk-bottles-406
> A Washington state dairy is voluntarily recalling certain milk and cream products because they were not adequately pasteurized. Pure Eire Dairy of Othello, WA issued a recall of its organic pasteurized non-homogenized skim, reduced fat 2% milk, and whole and heavy cream milk products bearing the expiration dates of 5/15/13, 5/18/13 and 5/20/13 Monday. The recallâ¦
> _
> 
> I figure if one is old enough to buy and pay for whatever they wish to drink, eat, wear, drive, or listen to - watch - etc. - it's on them. _Life has no guarantees_ and personally, life is a bit more fun when spent not worrying so much over what other folks are doing. I have enough to do without worrying about whether my neighbor is drinking milk - no matter what type.


Well, the world is not run by how you figure.
Did you read the first web site you posted? New Zealand whey product by the Company connected to the China company that put melamine in baby formula. Is that all you've got?
Then the next web site, did you read it either? Non-hazardous cleaner and under pasteurized milk. The others you didn't detail from the web site, milk from cattle that had TB, which would be safe if pasteurized but dangerous raw, Chicken nuggets, cookies, frozen deserts and sea salt product recalled because the label failed to mention milk in the ingredients, hardly a pasteurization issue. 

Please go back and actually read the report I posted. Can you imagine how that mother must feel?


----------



## sidepasser

Actually I did read the articles. My point is that for every article you post touting the dangers of drinking raw milk, I can find an article for recalled milk or milk products. I raised three kids on raw goat's milk. All are healthy and doing well. Yes people get sick from eating or drinking unprocessed food products. They also get sick from eating processed food inspected by government officials. Do we ban all food? No, we take our chances on some anonymous government employee who may have had a hangover on the day he inspected the ground beef and decided that he would pass this lot because the last five were OK. It happens because people are always not diligent, caring, concerned or paying attention. I still eat ground beef and sometimes I eat it medium rare. You seem to have taken this raw milk as a personal crusade and that is fine, but have you ever thought about for every story you dig up about someone getting sick that there are folks living and doing well who have never had a problem with it? There are literally millions of people who are drinking raw milk this morning and I doubt that all of them will get sick, need transplants or die. Yes there will be the outlier who will get sick, but the majority will be fine. Point is people are responsible for their choices in life. The end result is they live and sometimes die by those choices. Taking responsibility for one's actions seems to be dying out in favor of having a government entity make decisions for us. Putting blind trust in a gov employee is why we have warnings on meat to fully cook it. Even the gov. Knows they won't catch everything.


----------



## haypoint

sidepasser said:


> Actually I did read the articles. My point is that for every article you post touting the dangers of drinking raw milk, I can find an article for recalled milk or milk products. I raised three kids on raw goat's milk. All are healthy and doing well. Yes people get sick from eating or drinking unprocessed food products. They also get sick from eating processed food inspected by government officials. Do we ban all food? No, we take our chances on some anonymous government employee who may have had a hangover on the day he inspected the ground beef and decided that he would pass this lot because the last five were OK. It happens because people are always not diligent, caring, concerned or paying attention. I still eat ground beef and sometimes I eat it medium rare. You seem to have taken this raw milk as a personal crusade and that is fine, but have you ever thought about for every story you dig up about someone getting sick that there are folks living and doing well who have never had a problem with it? There are literally millions of people who are drinking raw milk this morning and I doubt that all of them will get sick, need transplants or die. Yes there will be the outlier who will get sick, but the majority will be fine. Point is people are responsible for their choices in life. The end result is they live and sometimes die by those choices. Taking responsibility for one's actions seems to be dying out in favor of having a government entity make decisions for us. Putting blind trust in a gov employee is why we have warnings on meat to fully cook it. Even the gov. Knows they won't catch everything.


I understand your point of view. But your response to the report about life threatening results from buying raw milk was, "Well there are recalls of regular milk products such as these:" But you really can't include foods that were perfectly sanitary, but recalled because milk got left off the ingredient label. When the ratio of pasteurized versus raw sold in the US is 10,000 to 1, there still far more incidents of illness with raw milk. I have no concern over you feeding your children raw milk. Selling it or buying it is another matter. I wish people would accept the fact that healthy looking cows, kept in healthy looking facilities, fed healthy looking feed, bred to healthy looking bulls, milked in a clean looking environment, placed into clean looking containers, can produce milk with a variety of diseases and harmful bacteria.
As the title says, don't read if you don't want to know.:thumb:


----------



## Evons hubby

I dont trust milk in either variety... pasteurized or not. 

Nearly every heroin addict in the world drank milk as a dietary mainstay as an infant.... same for alcoholics... they too were avid milk fans as infants.. mass murderers drank a lot of milk.... its been proven over and over when checked on... wife beaters are the victims of drinking milk as an infant... many continued to drink this obviously mental destablizer well into their adult years. Charles Manson, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, the list is endless of those crazies who drank literally gallons of the stuff as children!!! Why would any rational parent force this horrible "food" down their offspring?!?!!?!


----------



## haypoint

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I dont trust milk in either variety... pasteurized or not.
> 
> Nearly every heroin addict in the world drank milk as a dietary mainstay as an infant.... same for alcoholics... they too were avid milk fans as infants.. mass murderers drank a lot of milk.... its been proven over and over when checked on... wife beaters are the victims of drinking milk as an infant... many continued to drink this obviously mental destablizer well into their adult years. Charles Manson, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, the list is endless of those crazies who drank literally gallons of the stuff as children!!! Why would any rational parent force this horrible "food" down their offspring?!?!!?!


Read the title of this lengthy thread. You intentionally opened this thread. If you don't want to read facts, ignore it. It is easy.


----------



## Laura

Because for some reason Haypoint, you misrepresent what the true facts are. You offer hyperbole much as the magic milk people do, not education. 

The raw milk laws were put into place before refrigeration and sanitation and culture testing.

Children and babies under 2 should not partake of raw dairy. Pregnant women should not partake of raw dairy. Elderly or infirm with compromised immune systems should not partake of raw dairy. While the health risks are few and far between, the results can be devastating when it's your kid.

Nobody should drink raw dairy that is not routinely culture tested.

Funny how I can drink raw dairy from a clean cow, but get so sick I wanna die every time I eat in a restaurant. Go figure.


----------



## haypoint

Laura said:


> Because for some reason Haypoint, you misrepresent what the true facts are. You offer hyperbole much as the magic milk people do, not education.
> 
> The raw milk laws were put into place before refrigeration and sanitation and culture testing.
> 
> Children and babies under 2 should not partake of raw dairy. Pregnant women should not partake of raw dairy. Elderly or infirm with compromised immune systems should not partake of raw dairy. While the health risks are few and far between, the results can be devastating when it's your kid.
> 
> Nobody should drink raw dairy that is not routinely culture tested.
> 
> Funny how I can drink raw dairy from a clean cow, but get so sick I wanna die every time I eat in a restaurant. Go figure.


 Well at least we agree on parts of the population. When people sell raw milk, do they tell people not to allow the children to drink it? Do they warn against feeding raw milk to the elderly?

How often do you think is "routinely"? What types of pathogens should be routinely cultured? 

If I have posted reports that are not facts, point them out, specifically. I'd welcome a chance to review my facts.:cowboy:

Try a restaurant that does not employ third world prep cooks.


----------



## gweny

Before I went to my local dairy farm I did some research , like the mom with the 2yo must have... It seems easy to understand; but please correct me if I'm wrong here...
If you pasteurize at 120F the milk is fine (assuming the cows weren't fed hormones, steroids, etc.) but if that milk heats up to 130F the fat in the milk separates creating a chemical compound that may cause cancer.
If that's correct than why didn't the mother just buy locally , congruent to her locavore beliefs; and pasteurize it herself?!?!


----------



## haypoint

gweny said:


> Before I went to my local dairy farm I did some research , like the mom with the 2yo must have... It seems easy to understand; but please correct me if I'm wrong here...
> If you pasteurize at 120F the milk is fine (assuming the cows weren't fed hormones, steroids, etc.) but if that milk heats up to 130F the fat in the milk separates creating a chemical compound that may cause cancer.
> If that's correct than why didn't the mother just buy locally , congruent to her locavore beliefs; and pasteurize it herself?!?!


There is a myth that vitamins and minerals are lost in pasteurization. There is a myth that pasteurization kills "good" bacteria, along with salmonella, listeria, tuberculosis, brucellosis, campylobacter, etc.

You are correct, this tragedy could have been avoided with home pasteurization.
I am unaware of any cancer causing compound created by over heating milk.


----------



## Ziptie

It's not a myth that vitamins and minerals are lost in pasteurization. Heat destroys things probably not all of them. More heat =more loss of nutrients but longer shelf life of the milk.:lookout:

Plus pasteurization destroys the proteins in the milk. Have you ever tried making cheese with ultra pasteurized milk? It won't happen, can't get the curds to firm up.

Another interesting fact. Most of store bought milk has and oil added to it. Usually corn/vegetable oil. Why..because the vit and minerals are found in the cream and for the minerals to stay suspended in the milk they need to attach to some kind of fat. Don't believe me call the number on your milk jug(if you buy from the store) and ask them. :icecream:


----------



## haypoint

Ziptie said:


> It's not a myth that vitamins and minerals are lost in pasteurization. Heat destroys things probably not all of them. More heat =more loss of nutrients but longer shelf life of the milk.:lookout:
> 
> Plus pasteurization destroys the proteins in the milk. Have you ever tried making cheese with ultra pasteurized milk? It won't happen, can't get the curds to firm up.
> 
> Another interesting fact. Most of store bought milk has and oil added to it. Usually corn/vegetable oil. Why..because the vit and minerals are found in the cream and for the minerals to stay suspended in the milk they need to attach to some kind of fat. Don't believe me call the number on your milk jug(if you buy from the store) and ask them. :icecream:


I have not studied ultra pasteurized milk, but all of the rest of what you wrote is wrong. Where did you get these ideas?
There is never any oil added to milk. Any oil added to milk would require listing on the label.
Pasteurization cannot remove minerals.
Pasteurization does not destroy a measurable amount of vitamins. There have been studies over the years that prove this.


----------



## arabian knight

I am sure that was for Ultra Pasteurized which has nothing to do with this conversation as that is something all by itself, and does not represent the rest of pasteurized milk.
I am a huge milk drinker, store bought that is, and I do NOT Like that Ultra Pasteurized milk one bit, as it does not taste like rest of the regular milk does.
So Take that Ultra Pasteurized milk out of the equation all together, and out of this conversation completely.


----------



## Ziptie

Well haypoint you can call Anderson Erickson and a few other of the milk processors(not dairyman) on Monday and talk with them. You might be surprised. It is considered a processing aid and does not need to be labelled. This is not something I have read on the the internet I have talked to the source. Most of the milk in this area is ultra Pastured. Look for the UP label in the front of the milk or cream that you buy. I know all of the AE cream that we buy is UP otherwise we would not be able to use it(our cow is not producing enough cream for butter for us).


----------



## Ziptie

Well.. I thought why wait:shocked:

Now this is only a patent info on how they work the vit in the milk. I thought it gave a good back ground...

http://www.google.com/patents/US5480661

Abstract
An oil-based vitamin A and Vitamin D preparation having a specific gravity greater than 1.0 used to fortify milk products. The preparation contains vitamin A palmitate, Vitamin D.sub.3 resin, ester gum and/or brominated vegetable oil, corn oil, polysorbate 80, and triglycerol monooleate. The preparation is added to the milk product any time during processing and remains dispersed in the milk phase during centrifugal separation. The 
preparation is concentrated, resists oxidation, and does not require refrigeration.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION This invention relates generally to vitamin additives for milk products, more specifically to an improved Vitamin A and D mixture having a specific gravity greater than 1.0 that can be added to a milk product at any stage of preparation.
Generally, commercial dairies fortify milk products with vitamins A and D. For example, prior to packaging the dairy adds vitamin D.sub.3 to whole milk and vitamins A and D.sub.3 to low fat and skim milk. Currently whole milk is fortified with 400 international units (IU) of vitamin D.sub.3 per quart of whole milk. Whole milk does not require the addition of vitamin A since natural Vitamin A palmitate is present in whole milk at levels of approximately 1400 I.U. to 1600 I.U. per quart.
Low fat milk, however, has lower levels of naturally occurring vitamin A. Skim milk has no measurable amounts of natural vitamin A since the natural vitamin A is found in the milkfat phase of whole milk. Therefore, low-fat milk and skim milk are fortified to levels of approximately 2000 I.U. of Vitamin A and 400 I.U. of Vitamin D.sub.3 per quart.
There are two general methods known to the art for adding Vitamins A and D.sub.3 to milk products. The first method requires the injection of a water soluble emulsion into the milk, while the second method requires injection of an oil soluble vitamin preparation into the milk. Both of these prior art methods have drawbacks which cause extra expense and processing difficulties for the user. Each of these prior art processes will be explained hereinafter.
Water Soluble Emulsion Method A typical water soluble emulsion of Vitamin A and D.sub.3 contains mostly water, Vitamins A and D, propylene glycol (solvent), polysorbate 80 (emulsifying agent) and sodium benzoate (preservative). One commercially used formula, known as Vita-Rite A & D "H"-W Formula #19267, made by Consolidated Flavor Corporation, St. Louis, Mo., has the following formula, by weight:

______________________________________Polysorbate 80 25% to 35%Water 
50% to 60%Propylene Glycol 
7% to 17%Vitamin D.sub.3 Resin 
0.03% to 0.06%Vitamin A Palmitate 4.2% to 5.2%(1.75 mu/g)______________________________________


----------



## haypoint

Ziptie said:


> Well.. I thought why wait:shocked:
> 
> Now this is only a patent info on how they work the vit in the milk. I thought it gave a good back ground...
> 
> http://www.google.com/patents/US5480661
> 
> Abstract
> An oil-based vitamin A and Vitamin D preparation having a specific gravity greater than 1.0 used to fortify milk products. The preparation contains vitamin A palmitate, Vitamin D.sub.3 resin, ester gum and/or brominated vegetable oil, corn oil, polysorbate 80, and triglycerol monooleate. The preparation is added to the milk product any time during processing and remains dispersed in the milk phase during centrifugal separation. The
> preparation is concentrated, resists oxidation, and does not require refrigeration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION This invention relates generally to vitamin additives for milk products, more specifically to an improved Vitamin A and D mixture having a specific gravity greater than 1.0 that can be added to a milk product at any stage of preparation.
> Generally, commercial dairies fortify milk products with vitamins A and D. For example, prior to packaging the dairy adds vitamin D.sub.3 to whole milk and vitamins A and D.sub.3 to low fat and skim milk. Currently whole milk is fortified with 400 international units (IU) of vitamin D.sub.3 per quart of whole milk. Whole milk does not require the addition of vitamin A since natural Vitamin A palmitate is present in whole milk at levels of approximately 1400 I.U. to 1600 I.U. per quart.
> Low fat milk, however, has lower levels of naturally occurring vitamin A. Skim milk has no measurable amounts of natural vitamin A since the natural vitamin A is found in the milkfat phase of whole milk. Therefore, low-fat milk and skim milk are fortified to levels of approximately 2000 I.U. of Vitamin A and 400 I.U. of Vitamin D.sub.3 per quart.
> There are two general methods known to the art for adding Vitamins A and D.sub.3 to milk products. The first method requires the injection of a water soluble emulsion into the milk, while the second method requires injection of an oil soluble vitamin preparation into the milk. Both of these prior art methods have drawbacks which cause extra expense and processing difficulties for the user. Each of these prior art processes will be explained hereinafter.
> Water Soluble Emulsion Method A typical water soluble emulsion of Vitamin A and D.sub.3 contains mostly water, Vitamins A and D, propylene glycol (solvent), polysorbate 80 (emulsifying agent) and sodium benzoate (preservative). One commercially used formula, known as Vita-Rite A & D "H"-W Formula #19267, made by Consolidated Flavor Corporation, St. Louis, Mo., has the following formula, by weight:
> 
> ______________________________________Polysorbate 80 25% to 35%Water
> 50% to 60%Propylene Glycol
> 7% to 17%Vitamin D.sub.3 Resin
> 0.03% to 0.06%Vitamin A Palmitate 4.2% to 5.2%(1.75 mu/g)______________________________________


I understand the patented invention. I am unaware of the widespread use of oil and oil soluble vitamins in commercially produced milk. There are inventions on many products, most are unadapted. Adding water soluble or oil soluble vitamins is different from adding vegetable oil to milk.


----------



## Ziptie

I understand that most patents do not become an accepted practice. It was just a quick example of they do in fact use an oil(and several other things) as a carrier for the vits. They only way one can find out for oneself is to call the company and find out.

Sorry for the total thread hijack. But, I thought this thread was to present knowledge about why pasteurization is good and it is a good thing, but one should not be blind to the consequence of doing this.

If they would not add the corn oil to milk and UP the milk our dear cow would go the way of dodo in a second. 

As a disclaimer we do not pasteurize our milk because were too lazy.:smack


----------



## haypoint

Ziptie said:


> I understand that most patents do not become an accepted practice. It was just a quick example of they do in fact use an oil(and several other things) as a carrier for the vits. They only way one can find out for oneself is to call the company and find out.
> 
> Sorry for the total thread hijack. But, I thought this thread was to present knowledge about why pasteurization is good and it is a good thing, but one should not be blind to the consequence of doing this.
> 
> If they would not add the corn oil to milk and UP the milk our dear cow would go the way of dodo in a second.
> 
> As a disclaimer we do not pasteurize our milk because were too lazy.:smack


Yes, this isn't a thread about how great pasteurization or pasteurized milk is, more of a place to read about the latest sicknesses from raw milk, for those that care to be kept up to date. I have no beef with you drinking milk from your dear cow. 
The only oil added to milk i have ever heard of was the oil Deans added to their organic milk. But that's a story for another day.


----------



## PrettyPaisley

A couple of years ago in NC there was an outbreak of something and they tried to pin it on a dairy in SC. Seems two or three of the dozens of people who got sick drank legal raw milk from the SC dairy so the state STOPPED any further investigation on what really caused the outbreak. In the raw milk circles the farmer was vindicated but the ignorant masses still do not know or care to know the truth. There was some one liner at the bottom of the back page of the paper about how the outbreak wasn't caused by the raw milk but you can believe the local talk radio station that harped on it for days never mentioned the truth. I distinctly recall posting on their Facebook page a link to the article in the paper demanding a retraction. It didn't happen. (Besides, no one listens to me anyway.)  

Tell me more about how the gov't has our best interest at heart. I'm all ears.


----------



## haypoint

PrettyPaisley said:


> A couple of years ago in NC there was an outbreak of something and they tried to pin it on a dairy in SC. Seems two or three of the dozens of people who got sick drank legal raw milk from the SC dairy so the state STOPPED any further investigation on what really caused the outbreak. In the raw milk circles the farmer was vindicated but the ignorant masses still do not know or care to know the truth. There was some one liner at the bottom of the back page of the paper about how the outbreak wasn't caused by the raw milk but you can believe the local talk radio station that harped on it for days never mentioned the truth. I distinctly recall posting on their Facebook page a link to the article in the paper demanding a retraction. It didn't happen. (Besides, no one listens to me anyway.)
> 
> Tell me more about how the gov't has our best interest at heart. I'm all ears.


If the health department can not make a lab tested verifiable connection between the sick people and the milk, it is not considered a raw milk related problem.
Let me explain. If you sold milk to 25 families in a small community, and everyone from all 25 families got sick, most wouldn't go to the hospital. If 10 went to the hospital, it probably wouldn't get reported to the Health Department. In the rare case, it got reported, the Health Department may question the people that went to the hospital. They would try to make a connection, maybe several connections. They would get samples of vomit or stool, if available. (generally not)Then they'd go to their houses and run tests on the food, including the milk. Generally, by this time, the container of raw milk has been used up and washed out. If they couldn't make a connection between the bacteria from the patient and the food, it would be dropped. 
In a few such cases where there was a sample from a patient, sample of the milk at home, then they would take samples at the dairy. The Lab can match the salmonella strains from the sample at the hospital, in the milk jug at home to the strain in the dairy, then and only then can they pin it to the dairy. 
Based on what you wrote, I'd guess the Health Department lacked the trail of evidence, so backed off. But those that love raw milk think the dairy is innocent, while everyone else thinks they don't need a Lab proven chain of evidence to believe the dairy shipped bad milk.


----------



## haypoint

"Bovine leukemia virus (BLV), a deltaretrovirus, causes B-cell leukemia/lymphoma in cattle and is prevalent in herds globally. A previous finding of antibodies against BLV in humans led us to examine the possibility of human infection with BLV. We focused on breast tissue because, in cattle, BLV DNA and protein have been found to be more abundant in mammary epithelium than in lymphocytes. In human breast tissue specimens, we identified BLV DNA by using nested liquid-phase PCR and DNA sequencing. Variations from the bovine reference sequence were infrequent and limited to base substitutions. In situ PCR and immunohistochemical testing localized BLV to the secretory epithelium of the breast. Our finding of BLV in human tissues indicates a risk for the acquisition and proliferation of this virus in humans. Further research is needed to determine whether BLV may play a direct role in human disease."
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/20/5/13-1298_article.htm
"Lukemia Virus-infected cattle herds are found worldwide. In the United States, &#8776;38% of beef herds, 84% of all dairy herds, and 100% of large-scale dairy operation herds are infected"

This virus is killed by normal pasturization.


----------



## Laura

Because having a wide variety of antibodies for a healthy immune system from partaking of living raw dairy is a bad thing in your book, right?


----------



## haypoint

Laura said:


> Because having a wide variety of antibodies for a healthy immune system from partaking of living raw dairy is a bad thing in your book, right?


Depends. Generally the proof that you have a disease is that you have the tell tale reaction as shown in the existance of antibodies. Proof that your body has fought against it. Sometimes that is proof of immunity, sometimes it is proof of the disease.

If I am immunized against Hep.m a test will show antibodies. If I have an incurable form of Hep, my body will show antibodies.

Given a choice, I'd rather not be exposed to lukemia.


----------



## haypoint

Maryland Raw Milk Bill Dies
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]By Linda Larsen[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Food Poisoning Bulletin[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]March 26, 2014[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Maryland House Bill 3, the legislation that would have allowed individual cow-share or herd-share in that state, making raw milk legal, is dead. The bill was stuck in committee after a report by the Department of Legislative Services found that the bill would double raw-milk outbreaks and increase the number of individual illnesses from raw milk.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Raw milk is the source of a Campylobacter outbreak.That study showed that making raw, or unpasteurized, milk legal would increase government costs in that state by at least $66,000 per year, up to $95,000 per year in four years. That is independent of the costs of illness, medical bills, and lost wages.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Dr. Katherine Feldman, of the Maryland Health Department's infectious diseases bureau, said that "pasteurization is the cornerstone of milk safety and a triumph of public health." States that allow raw milk sales have twice as many outbreaks of milk-linked diseases. And a study conducted in Pennsylvania in 2009 found that 5% to 20% of raw milk is contaminated with bacteria.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Full text:[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]http://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/2014/maryland-raw-milk-bill-dies/[/FONT][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]


----------



## arabian knight

I wouldn't doubt that a bit, the mare that drink the stuff, the more will get sick. Simple as that.


----------



## Ambereyes

Think I will have a nice glass of milk with lunch, nice, cold and not pasteurized.


----------



## haypoint

arabian knight said:


> I wouldn't doubt that a bit, the mare that drink the stuff, the more will get sick. Simple as that.


Yes, you are correct, but also when something becomes legal, people are more likely to report a sickness than if they were doing it illegally.


----------



## Patchouli

haypoint said:


> I thought Dollmaker might find this interesting:
> 
> MDARD continues to work with a Southeast Michigan dairy plant with confirmed Listeria monocytogenes contamination that has recurred in two cheese products. Production of the two products has been ceased and the plant is reassessing its sanitation program.


Because it has to have been the milk right? The vast majority of listeria outbreaks are lunchmeat and raw lettuce/greens related. Maybe you should start a campaign to ban Chef salads? :thumb:


----------



## arabian knight

Thats because more people eat Chef Salads then drink raw milk so the number IS going to be higher. If it was the other way around then Raw Milk WOULD be on top.


----------



## haypoint

Patchouli said:


> Because it has to have been the milk right? The vast majority of listeria outbreaks are lunchmeat and raw lettuce/greens related. Maybe you should start a campaign to ban Chef salads? :thumb:


At one time, I would have had to agree with you. But now, I know a bit more about the process. When a Lab finds listeria (or just about any bacteria) they can do a sort of DNA test on it and match the strain to the product. The strains mutate fairly quickly, so sometimes it is harder to match. So, if people got sick and they all ate salad and milk, the strains in the salad would be compared to the strain in the sick consumer. So, if you are thinking raw milk is getting blamed for bad salads, that isn't so.

While there has been, and continues to be lots of food safety steps to insure everything in your Chef Salad is safe, most food related issues are caused by improper handling after it leaves the store.


----------



## Patchouli

haypoint said:


> At one time, I would have had to agree with you. But now, I know a bit more about the process. When a Lab finds listeria (or just about any bacteria) they can do a sort of DNA test on it and match the strain to the product. The strains mutate fairly quickly, so sometimes it is harder to match. So, if people got sick and they all ate salad and milk, the strains in the salad would be compared to the strain in the sick consumer. So, if you are thinking raw milk is getting blamed for bad salads, that isn't so.
> 
> While there has been, and continues to be lots of food safety steps to insure everything in your Chef Salad is safe, most food related issues are caused by improper handling after it leaves the store.


Most of the recent listeria outbreaks have either been store related or from the farm itself. The biggest recent outbreak was actually the cantaloupe one last year.


----------



## haypoint

Patchouli said:


> Most of the recent listeria outbreaks have either been store related or from the farm itself. The biggest recent outbreak was actually the cantaloupe one last year.


I believe those guys got prison time, as well they should.

But incidents such as these are rare enough to gather national interest.


----------



## DJ in WA

I see ol' Haypoint is still at it.

Let's simplify this. Which would you rather consume, raw milk from a herd of two, in clean conditions with less chance of disease, or cooked milk from the dirty cows in the second photo?

Like I used to teach in food safety briefings, make sure you cook the feces before you consume it. That is our government's message.


----------



## arabian knight

What a bunch of propaganda that last pic is and that in no way represents the modern daily operation and you know it~!


----------



## arabian knight

[YOUTUBE]?v=JJRy82i8e5Q[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]?v=0pv35dYBMX4[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]?v=TS19b8g0Hqw[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## idigbeets

Oh please, you're posting the Hastings dairy undercover crapola.... Most of that footage is years old and cherry picked by HSUS and MFA to make dairying look as bad as possible.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> I see ol' Haypoint is still at it.
> 
> Let's simplify this. Which would you rather consume, raw milk from a herd of two, in clean conditions with less chance of disease, or cooked milk from the dirty cows in the second photo?
> 
> Like I used to teach in food safety briefings, make sure you cook the feces before you consume it. That is our government's message.


If only the world were so simple. If every commercial cow were wallowing in filth and every cow providing raw milk for market were so clean. Would you change your mind if I provided photos of a small organic dairy with filthy conditions and a large commercial dairy with clean cows? I doubt it would change your mind.
But beyond pictures, look at the facts. Contaminated raw milk is making people sick. Healthy looking cows can produce milk with disease bacteria, like Campylobacter and Listeria. Sure, you can get E Coli from cow manure getting into the milk. But that is just a good argument against milking into a bucket.
But I'll keep adding news reports about proven cases that people got sick from drinking raw milk. As the title clearly states, if you don't want to know, don't read it.


----------



## greg273

Yes, Haypoint, we've heard your position before; raw milk bad, pesticides good.


----------



## haypoint

greg273 said:


> Yes, Haypoint, we've heard your position before; raw milk bad, pesticides good.


Please take your personal attacks to my private mail. 

This thread is just informational about raw milk and those sickened by it. If you don't like it, don't read it.

Much of what I write about is what I see as a broad brush by some folks that everything raw milk is good, clean cows are therefore healthy, etc. On other threads, NOT related to this discussion, pesticides can be an effective tool on your homestead, if you understand how they work and can safely manage them.


----------



## greg273

You're right,CONTAMINATED raw milk makes people sick. As does CONTAMINATED raw lettuce, strawberries, cantaloupe, etc, etc.


----------



## haypoint

greg273 said:


> You're right,CONTAMINATED raw milk makes people sick. As does CONTAMINATED raw lettuce, strawberries, cantaloupe, etc, etc.


Be sure to wash your milk and lettuce before consuming. Contaminated milk can include milk right out of the cow.

Because people died from eating contaminated cantaloupe, we should let people drink contaminated raw milk? 

Even if after 10 pages, you still don't understand. I am against the sale of raw milk because healthy looking cows can produce diseased and infected milk. No one can afford to test each batch of raw milk for every pathogen. I am against the purchase of raw milk for the same reason, plus proper handling is critical, yet out of your control as a buyer. I don't want my tax dollars going to pay the Health Department's investigation related to your risky behavior.

However, I encourage those that care to milk their own mammal and consume it and promise to abstain from utilizing any taxpayer subsidized health care if it makes them sick, then go for it.


----------



## greg273

Yes, raw milk can harbor disease causing agents. And no, I do not believe it should be against the law to buy or sell it. The local gas station sells a hundred products far worse than raw milk, legally, every day. Personally, I don't drink much milk anymore, I drank raw milk for years, bought on the 'down low' from a neighbor, and only experienced one incident in 20 years where it might have 'not sat well'. But given the fact I can go to the store and buy a pack of smokes and a bottle of vodka, drop on down to a restaurant and order up some raw fish, I question the legality of banning the sale of raw milk. Buyer beware, as always...


----------



## haypoint

greg273 said:


> Yes, raw milk can harbor disease causing agents. And no, I do not believe it should be against the law to buy or sell it. The local gas station sells a hundred products far worse than raw milk, legally, every day. Personally, I don't drink much milk anymore, I drank raw milk for years, bought on the 'down low' from a neighbor, and only experienced one incident in 20 years where it might have 'not sat well'. But given the fact I can go to the store and buy a pack of smokes and a bottle of vodka, drop on down to a restaurant and order up some raw fish, I question the legality of banning the sale of raw milk. Buyer beware, as always...


No, it's not buyer beware when it comes to food safety. Hasn't been buyer beware for a hundred years. However, I don't have much issue with you and a neighbor drinking raw milk. Doubtful that your widow would sue the neighbor and not much chance that you two would tarnish the reputation of pasteurized milk. 

If a guy told me that he has been crossing Rail Road tracks without looking either way for 20 years and had only one close call, I wouldn't think it safe to do the same. Risky behavior and easily preventable.


----------



## Patchouli

idigbeets said:


> Oh please, you're posting the Hastings dairy undercover crapola.... Most of that footage is years old and cherry picked by HSUS and MFA to make dairying look as bad as possible.


Everybody cherry picks.  You don't think the Hastings dairy stuff wasn't filmed the day after they made sure everything was spotless and anything unseemly was edited out? We all do it to make our point whether it is marketing or winning an argument.


----------



## Patchouli

haypoint said:


> Be sure to wash your milk and lettuce before consuming. Contaminated milk can include milk right out of the cow.
> 
> Because people died from eating contaminated cantaloupe, we should let people drink contaminated raw milk?
> 
> Even if after 10 pages, you still don't understand. I am against the sale of raw milk because healthy looking cows can produce diseased and infected milk. No one can afford to test each batch of raw milk for every pathogen. I am against the purchase of raw milk for the same reason, plus proper handling is critical, yet out of your control as a buyer. I don't want my tax dollars going to pay the Health Department's investigation related to your risky behavior.
> 
> However, I encourage those that care to milk their own mammal and consume it and promise to abstain from utilizing any taxpayer subsidized health care if it makes them sick, then go for it.


Then I hope you are also strongly against the sale of hamburger. Because good old safely handled and USDA inspected ground beef kills more people every year than anything else out there. 

Not to mention if you are worried about your tax dollars going to healthcare for people getting sick from food related illnesses I hope you routinely protest in front of Dunkin Donuts and McDonalds. Because we spend way more on diabetes and heart disease than we ever will on raw milk illnesses.


----------



## arabian knight

No Like Micky D's is is NOT there fault that People ORDER at their free will a Large Fry and a Double quarter pounder. They also OFFER a small burger, and other OPTIONS besides fries.
It IS PEOPLE, not the place that they eat at. 
They do not have to be a pig. It IS their Choice to Eat where they eat, as much as they want to eat, and What they want, and NOBODY has the right to tell them not to do it., NOBODY. Sure as heck not the government~! Nor busy bodies either that don't like to see people eat as much as they want no matter what it is.


----------



## haypoint

Patchouli said:


> Then I hope you are also strongly against the sale of hamburger. Because good old safely handled and USDA inspected ground beef kills more people every year than anything else out there.
> 
> Not to mention if you are worried about your tax dollars going to healthcare for people getting sick from food related illnesses I hope you routinely protest in front of Dunkin Donuts and McDonalds. Because we spend way more on diabetes and heart disease than we ever will on raw milk illnesses.


Show me the death rate caused by hamburger.


----------



## mrs whodunit

Should be more concerned about medical error causing deaths than raw milk as death by medical errors is the 3rd leading cause of death in the USA.

Now THAT is something to worry about not the 3 deaths from raw milk in 13 years.


----------



## haypoint

mrs whodunit said:


> Should be more concerned about medical error causing deaths than raw milk as death by medical errors is the 3rd leading cause of death in the USA.
> 
> Now THAT is something to worry about not the 3 deaths from raw milk in 13 years.


And car crashes, too? Let's give up on air bags because people are dying due to medical errors?

What's the ratio of people that bought raw milk last year and the number of medical procedures preformed? 

But we are getting a bit far afield aren't we?


----------



## Patchouli

*http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsfoodborneoutbreaks/*
*Identifying Common Foods and Germs*

The pathogen-commodity pairs (germs and foods) responsible for the most outbreak-related illnesses, hospitalizations, and death in 2009-2010 were:



*Illnesses*
_Salmonella_ in eggs (2231 illnesses)
_Salmonella_ in sprouts (493 illnesses)
_Salmonella_ in vine-stalk vegetables (422 illnesses)
 
*Hospitalizations*
_Salmonella_ in vine-stalk vegetables (88 hospitalizations)
_E. coli_ O157 in beef (46 hospitalizations)
_Salmonella_ in sprouts (41 hospitalizations)
 
*Deaths*
_E. coli_ O157 in beef (3 deaths)
_Salmonella_ in pork (2 deaths)
_Listeria_ in dairy (2 deaths)


----------



## haypoint

How many people ate eggs in 2009-2010?
How many people drank raw milk in 2009-2010?
93,000,000,000 eggs were produced in 2009-2010
30,000,000,000 gallons of milk drank in 2009-2010
Of that less than one tenth of one percent was raw milk.
Far more people die in car crashes than die from parasailing off skyscrapers, but that doesn't mean parasailing off buildings is safer, does it?


----------



## arabian knight

The more people that drink raw milk the stats will go up. That is why there are so much difference in who is getting sick. Compared to the amounts of milk consumed raw to those that drink pasteurized milk is huge. 
So little drank in a percentage was raw milk the number getting sick would be low. But if everyone drank raw milk boy oh boy would the numbers be huge.


----------



## haypoint

Unpasteurized milk
Date: Fri 16 May 2014
Source: Fox 17 [edited]
<http://fox17online.com/2014/05/16/raw-milk-debate-stirred-up-by-e-coli-illnesses-in-west-mi>


Two people have fallen ill due to an aggressive strain of _E. coli_.
The Ottawa County [Michigan] Health Department said they believe the bacteria 
came from drinking raw milk from a cow share program in Ottawa County. Officials 
at health departments in Kent, Ottawa and Muskegon County [Michigan] say that a 
woman from Muskegon County and a 6-year-old boy from Kent County became sick and 
both reported drinking raw milk.

Raw milk is illegal for stores to sell. The only way that consumers can get it 
in Michigan is through a cow share or herd sharing program in which you own a 
cow, or a share in an animal, but pay a farmer to take care of the cow on their 
property and milk it.

Jesse Meerman, the owner of a similar organization, called Green Pastures in 
Coopersville [Ottawa County, Michigan], said, "A lot of people come to us." He 
said he has 250 customers that are part of a cow sharing program. "What we have 
is a herd share program," he said.
"So, if people want to own their own cows, it's the only way this works in 
Michigan, to get fresh, unprocessed milk. They bring their cow to us. The reason 
they do that is when they drink pasteurized milk they get sick. It's called 
lactose intolerance. There are other issues too."

The customers draw or pick up fresh milk weekly and pay Meerman to house and 
care for the milk cow. "The vast majority of bacteria are wonderful, beneficial 
in fact, and necessary, and the enzymes," said Meerman. "Pasteurization takes 
both out of the milk."

However, the Ottawa County Health Department said pasteurization is the only 
fail safe against the bacteria that can make you sick. They are speaking out 
about what they consider the dangers of drinking raw milk without the heat 
treatment done through pasteurization. "Raw milk is not pasteurized, is not heat 
pasteurized or heat treated, and the problem is that it can have bacteria in it, 
it can make you sick,"
said Adeline Hambley, Environmental Health Division Manager.

Hambley said the strain causing the illness in Kent County is the same notorious 
strain that killed a number of children in the 1990s. "This
O157 strain, I think people most related it to the Jack in the Box outbreak in 
California. 600 people were sick and 4 children died in that. It's a very 
serious illness that this can cause," said Hambley.

As for which "herd share" farm the milk may have come from, the Ottawa County 
Health Department said it can't confirm since they haven't done the exact tests 
to determine that for certain. Hambley said DNA tests that would be needed to 
confirm that the strain came from a particular farm have not been completed.

Meanwhile, on the Green Pasture herd share agreement, it specifically spells out 
that there are risks; it states: "Buyer is aware of the risks associated with 
the consumption of fresh unprocessed milk. Buyer agrees that he/she is 
personally assuming the liability for the consumption of fresh unprocessed milk 
and will educate Buyer's family members who may also consume the milk on a 
regular basis. This relieves GREEN PASTURES of this responsibility."

Meerman said his customers still believe they are making the right choice. 
"People who come to us are very confident that they want unprocessed milk," he 
said. "They are eating a lot of other foods that are considered adventurous. 
But, if you're worried about getting sick, probably salad is the most dangerous 
thing you can eat."

The joint statement from the Ottawa, Kent and Muskegon County Health Department 
is below:

Two cases of _E. coli_ O157:H7 in West Michigan have been traced back to 
consumption of raw milk products from an Ottawa County cow share program. In 
March [2014], a 31-year-old Muskegon County woman became ill after drinking raw 
milk, and in April [2014], a 6-year-old child from Kent County became ill after 
possible consumption of the raw milk product.

Organisms that make people sick are found in the intestines of animals. 
Contamination of milk occurs when fecal matter is present on the udder of an 
animal or in the equipment used to process the milk.
Enough bacteria to cause illness can be present and not be visibly dirty upon 
inspection. Pasteurizing is the process of heating the milk to high temperatures 
to kill the harmful bacteria that make you sick.
Raw or unpasteurized milk (sometimes called fresh milk or fresh unprocessed 
milk) is milk that comes directly from a cow, goat, sheep or other animal's 
udder and is not heat treated (pasteurized) to kill bacteria. Raw milk carries a 
much higher risk of causing serious illness than pasteurized milk, and you 
cannot see or smell the germs in raw milk that make you sick.

Some believe drinking raw milk products is more nutritious and provides the body 
with "good bacteria." The pasteurizing process does not significantly change the 
nutritional value of milk, and due to the risk of serious illness, there are far 
safer sources of good bacteria than raw milk. Pasteurized probiotic yogurts, 
kefir, and other products are a great source of probiotics.

The CDC reports that unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause 
foodborne illness, and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses 
involving pasteurized dairy products. Due to poorly developed immune systems, 
infants and children are at greater risk for becoming sick and are more likely 
to suffer from long term damage from diseases linked to drinking raw milk.

Due to the health risk of consuming raw milk, it is not legal to sell raw milk 
or raw milk products in the State of Michigan. Because of this, raw milk is 
obtained through herd share programs. In a herd share program, consumers 
purchase a share of a cow and, as the owner of the cow, are provided raw milk 
from the farmer. These herd share dairy programs are not licensed or inspected 
by state or local agencies.


----------



## Patchouli

Oh no 2 people got sick. Interesting on the one hand they say: "As for which "herd share" farm the milk may have come from, the Ottawa County Health Department said it can't confirm since they haven't done the exact tests to determine that for certain. Hambley said DNA tests that would be needed to confirm that the strain came from a particular farm have not been completed."

And then turn right around and say: "Two cases of _E. coli_ O157:H7 in West Michigan have been traced back to consumption of raw milk products from an Ottawa County cow share program. In March [2014], a 31-year-old Muskegon County woman became ill after drinking raw milk, and in April [2014], a 6-year-old child from Kent County became ill after possible consumption of the raw milk product."

They don't even know for sure the kid drank raw milk. Problem with these cases is they don't check everything in your fridge. As soon as you say raw milk they say case closed. How do they know it wasn't part of that 1.8 million pounds of ground beef that was just recalled for the exact same kind of E coli O157:H7?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/21/health/beef-recall/



> Check your ground beef before you grill out this Memorial Day weekend. The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service says stores in nine states may have received beef contaminated with E. coli O157:H7. The service announced this week that 1.8 million pounds of ground beef products were being recalled because they could be contaminated. The federal agency has since named retailers that may have received the tainted products.
> Some are as follows:
> &#8226; Gordon Food Service Marketplace stores in Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Wisconsin
> &#8226; Giorgio's Italian Delicatessen in Stuart, Florida
> &#8226; M Sixty Six General Store in Orleans, Michigan
> &#8226; Buchtel Food Mart in Buchtel, Ohio


----------



## PrettyPaisley

And I love how the article eludes to this strain of E. coli that may have caused the death of four kids who ate at Jack in the Box. Because we all know Jack in the Box sells deadly raw milk. 

Wonder if they could have snuck in a few bites of legal hummus or had a legal walnut ? 
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/22/health/hummus-walnuts-recall/index.html


----------



## arabian knight

Patchouli said:


> Oh no 2 people got sick. Interesting on the one hand they say: "As for which "herd share" farm the milk may have come from, the Ottawa County Health Department said it can't confirm since they haven't done the exact tests to determine that for certain. Hambley said DNA tests that would be needed to confirm that the strain came from a particular farm have not been completed."
> 
> And then turn right around and say: "Two cases of _E. coli_ O157:H7 in West Michigan have been traced back to consumption of raw milk products from an Ottawa County cow share program. In March [2014], a 31-year-old Muskegon County woman became ill after drinking raw milk, and in April [2014], a 6-year-old child from Kent County became ill after possible consumption of the raw milk product."
> 
> They don't even know for sure the kid drank raw milk. Problem with these cases is they don't check everything in your fridge. As soon as you say raw milk they say case closed. How do they know it wasn't part of that 1.8 million pounds of ground beef that was just recalled for the exact same kind of E coli O157:H7?
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/21/health/beef-recall/


 And if more people were drinking raw milk instead of Healthy Pasteurized milk More People would be getting sick.
But so few in this country ---- raw that the percentages are low, but turn that around and a huge amount of the population would be getting ill. And that IS a Fact


----------



## Mattemma

The USDA is constantly raiding these raw milkers. In one movie they actually poured out the milk while people who bought it watched at gun point.


----------



## arabian knight

If it wasn't safe cause it hadn't gone through pasteurization then that is the only thing they could do, is Pour it Right on the ground, and down the drain. Nobody is stopping a person form drinking the milk from their own cows that is raw, go for it, but once you Sell it, give it away or in anyway shapeup or form get said milk into the hands of the general public then laws must be followed to protect said people from getting sick.


----------



## PrettyPaisley

Mattemma said:


> The USDA is constantly raiding these raw milkers. In one movie they actually poured out the milk while people who bought it watched at gun point.


 
IIRC this happened in GA. A co-op purchased milk legally in SC and brought it across state lines. Thank heavens there were grown men there with guns to protect these heretics from their own demise.


----------



## Ziptie

arabian knight said:


> If it wasn't safe cause it hadn't gone through pasteurization then that is the only thing they could do, is Pour it Right on the ground, and down the drain. Nobody is stopping a person form drinking the milk from their own cows that is raw, go for it, but once you Sell it, give it away or in anyway shapeup or form get said milk into the hands of the general public then laws must be followed to protect said people from getting sick.


What happened to personal responsibility or the freedom to choose? If one is given a disclosure and they have to sign it before they pick up the milk. 


Have we as a population become so unintelligent that we have to have this all helping hand of the government to keep us safe. Your willing to take the risk of drinking raw milk...fine but then you have to live with the consequese also. That is the only law that needs to be around... not gun wielding crazyâs saying what we can a can't do. Then people may be a bit more discriminating where their raw milk comes from.


----------



## greg273

Its strange that the same guy who tells us carcinogenic 2,4D and corn that makes it own insecticide is perfectly safe, yet is worried about raw milk.


----------



## Ambereyes

arabian knight said:


> If it wasn't safe cause it hadn't gone through pasteurization then that is the only thing they could do, is Pour it Right on the ground, and down the drain. Nobody is stopping a person form drinking the milk from their own cows that is raw, go for it, but once you Sell it, give it away or in anyway shapeup or form get said milk into the hands of the general public then laws must be followed to protect said people from getting sick.


I do drink raw milk have all my life, from my own cows and goats. Can't stand the taste of pasteurized milk, not counting the problems with digestion when I do drink it. Now I avoid the pasteurized stuff at all times.


----------



## arabian knight

Good that is what you should do if that is what you want to drink. Your immune system has been built up over the years. But for the majority now living in the US their immune systems are not that strong and can lead to sickness. That is the problem here. The USDA has to rule for the majority not the minority here that is their job.


----------



## Ambereyes

arabian knight said:


> Good that is what you should do if that is what you want to drink. Your immune system has been built up over the years. But for the majority now living in the US their immune systems are not that strong and can lead to sickness. That is the problem here. The USDA has to rule for the majority not the minority here that is their job.



You hit the nail on the head, weak immune systems!


----------



## Patchouli

arabian knight said:


> And if more people were drinking raw milk instead of Healthy Pasteurized milk More People would be getting sick.
> But so few in this country ---- raw that the percentages are low, but turn that around and a huge amount of the population would be getting ill. And that IS a Fact


:bdh:


----------



## Patchouli

PrettyPaisley said:


> And I love how the article eludes to this strain of E. coli that may have caused the death of four kids who ate at Jack in the Box. Because we all know Jack in the Box sells deadly raw milk.
> 
> Wonder if they could have snuck in a few bites of legal hummus or had a legal walnut ?
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/22/health/hummus-walnuts-recall/index.html


I hadn't seen that one. Sprouts too. All things you would expect to find in the refrigerator of someone drinking raw milk too.


----------



## Patchouli

So just in the last week we have 7 tons of hummus recalled for Listeria and 1.8 million pounds of ground beef for E coli O157:H7. 5 of the people who got ill from the beef were in Michigan. I have a feeling some poor dairy is getting nailed for E coli it does not have. 
One thing that those who say if more people drank raw milk then we would have more outbreaks don't understand is that the logistics of how raw milk is produced and sold make that highly unlikely. The reason the beef and hummus recalls are so enormous is because of the factory conditions they are produced under. One cow with E coli gets mixed with a thousand other cows and you wind up with 2 million pounds of bad beef. 

Raw milk comes off small farms. Much smaller pool of people and milk. Much less likelihood of any more than a few people getting sick and even less of a chance because those milk drinkers will be acclimated to the milk and have bacteria populations in their guts more able to fight off any bad bugs anyways. 

Milk from 100 bulk tanks all over a state absolutely should be pasteurized. Milk from 5 or 10 cows at a local farm? Not so much.


----------



## haypoint

State Halts Raw [Goat] Milk Sales From Idaho Dairy
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]By News Desk[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Food Safety News[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]September 1, 2014[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]The sale of raw milk from Treasured Sunrise Acres in Parma, ID, has been put on hold until further notice by the Idaho Department of Agriculture after recently testing positive for Cryptosporidium.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Milk from Treasured Sunrise Acres tested positive for the parasite the week of Aug. 24, according to news reports. Two Canyon County residents who consumed the dairy's raw goat milk reportedly became ill.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]State officials said anyone who purchased raw goat or cow milk from the dairy or any retail outlets selling it on or after Aug. 24 should not consume the milk but should discard it. The milk was apparently sold in stores in Boise, Caldwell, Ketchum and Star.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]Full text:[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,serif][FONT=Arial,sans-serif]http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/09/state-halts-raw-milk-sales-from-idaho-dairy/#.VATi4mOCWdk[/FONT][FONT=Arial,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]


----------



## PrettyPaisley

Thanks for keeping us safe and in the loop. 

Could we appoint you to report on all halted and recalled food products, raw or otherwise? I'd hate for any unsafe food notice to slip through a crack.


----------



## haypoint

PrettyPaisley said:


> Thanks for keeping us safe and in the loop.
> 
> Could we appoint you to report on all halted and recalled food products, raw or otherwise? I'd hate for any unsafe food notice to slip through a crack.


Thanks, but no thanks. The ongoing illnesses in this tiny, specific fraction of our food system keeps me plenty busy. If I were to focus on spinach or strawberries, my updates would become rare. Plenty of "flash in the pan" one hit wonders. 
I see the USDA mandated recalls, as a result of USDA inspections and laboratory results as proof the system works. You see such recalls as government meddling.
When a million pounds of hamburger is recalled, I think it shows the public that not only is the batch of burger found contaminated recalled, but everything produced far into the past production and well into later batches. Since, IMHO, only dumb people eat grocery store burger raw, I don't have a problem selling it "May contain e Coli, cook well, 99 cents a pound". 
But raw milk isn't generally cooked prior to consumption. So, my concern over the health of others and the negative impact on dairy farmers that have nothing to do with this risky practice. 
Learn what "Cryptosporidium" is and let me know if you want Paisley to drink some.:kiss:


----------



## haypoint

Patchouli said:


> So just in the last week we have 7 tons of hummus recalled for Listeria and 1.8 million pounds of ground beef for E coli O157:H7. 5 of the people who got ill from the beef were in Michigan. I have a feeling some poor dairy is getting nailed for E coli it does not have.
> One thing that those who say if more people drank raw milk then we would have more outbreaks don't understand is that the logistics of how raw milk is produced and sold make that highly unlikely. The reason the beef and hummus recalls are so enormous is because of the factory conditions they are produced under. One cow with E coli gets mixed with a thousand other cows and you wind up with 2 million pounds of bad beef.
> 
> Raw milk comes off small farms. Much smaller pool of people and milk. Much less likelihood of any more than a few people getting sick and even less of a chance because those milk drinkers will be acclimated to the milk and have bacteria populations in their guts more able to fight off any bad bugs anyways.
> 
> Milk from 100 bulk tanks all over a state absolutely should be pasteurized. Milk from 5 or 10 cows at a local farm? Not so much.


As raw milk is illegal in most states, herd shares is a way around the inspections and regulation. That lends itself to small dairies. 

The milk from a thousand cows is just as likely to have a bacterial count equal to a small dairy. bacteria per gallon. 

In states that have recently legalized the sale of raw milk have experienced an increase in illnesses. Mostly because prior to being legal, consumers were les willing to admit illegal consumption. If the interest in raw milk increases, wouldn't the size of the dairy or number of cows increase?
Wasn't there a huge raw dairy in CO or was that just Organic. Then the raw milk dairy in MO that shipped tainted cheese to CA, they weren't a 5 or 10 herd dairy.


----------



## PrettyPaisley

I know what cryptosporidium is. I am not ignorant to the perceived dangers to raw milk. I worry far more every time I buy bagged lettuce and spinach than when she drinks milk from our herd. You know-those green leafy bits that are never cooked mid-well. 

I don't see the gov't meddling as much as I see you beating a dead horse over bacteria in raw milk in a dairy. You know as well as everyone else - there are far more frequent recalls and contamination issues with your gov't inspected food than you'll ever be able to document on raw milk. It's been stated before - life is a risk. You eat the processed, inspected crap and risk various and sundry auto-immune issues, gut issues, bacteria issues and a slow death, or you raise your food and know your source and you take the risk associated with real food and large dairy practices. But it's *your* risk to take - not your neighbors and surely not the gov'ts call to make.


----------



## arabian knight

Anytime ANY produce goes out to be Sold by somebody other then a USAD inspected facility there should and will be government controls. 
Drink and eat ANYTHING YOUY want but don't sell it or give it away to ANYONE outside of your immediate family That is only common sense. But I guess that is a little short in some.
Pasteurization is there to PROTECT and Serve The People want to risk you rife and your family so be it, but not you're neighbors that is where the government Does and Should step in. 
Ya there has been a few recalls thank goodness the system works~!


----------



## BlackFeather

I'm not opposed to pasturization of milk for those who want it, nor raw milk for those who want that. As a follower of Austrian Economics, I can't stand undue government intervention. Let the market decide. If you produce bad milk, no one will buy it your out of business, if your milk is good you expand. The problem is governments don't do stuff to protect the people, they do stuff to protect the special interest money donors. Give you an example here in New York. My father told this story, I believe it was set in the 50's. The dairy industry lobbied Albany to pass a law that all milk houses had to be a certain size or larger, it passed. What's so wrong with that? Large milk producers had large milk houses,but the small "20 cow" man had a small milk house. Thus put them out of business unless they spent money (which many didn't have) to rebuild bigger. The one fellow had just rebuilt his milk house, state of the art, but was 2 feet too short, they shut him off from selling. The motive was to keep the little man out of the market, same as today, trying to prevent small farmers from selling raw milk.

On farmers selling raw milk, what else do they sell, when the dairy truck comes along and farmers empty their milk tanks into it, is it pasturized then? No the dairy pasturizes it. When wheat leaves a farm is it made into bread already? no. Or corn do farmers turn it into corn flakes? no. Produce leaves the farm raw. It's up to the buyer to do what they want with it, whether it's a mega-corporation, or old grandma Jones from down the street. It isn't up to government to try to regulate that. The buyer is responsible ". If some one wants to buy raw milk from a farm, so be it, it's not the farmers responsibility to see to it they pasturize it. He only produces the raw product. That's like telling a lumber jack the tree he cuts down has to be used for lumber not paper. He doesn't care, he only cuts them down some one else processes them.


----------



## haypoint

BlackFeather said:


> I'm not opposed to pasturization of milk for those who want it, nor raw milk for those who want that. As a follower of Austrian Economics, I can't stand undue government intervention. Let the market decide. If you produce bad milk, no one will buy it your out of business, if your milk is good you expand. The problem is governments don't do stuff to protect the people, they do stuff to protect the special interest money donors. Give you an example here in New York. My father told this story, I believe it was set in the 50's. The dairy industry lobbied Albany to pass a law that all milk houses had to be a certain size or larger, it passed. What's so wrong with that? Large milk producers had large milk houses,but the small "20 cow" man had a small milk house. Thus put them out of business unless they spent money (which many didn't have) to rebuild bigger. The one fellow had just rebuilt his milk house, state of the art, but was 2 feet too short, they shut him off from selling. The motive was to keep the little man out of the market, same as today, trying to prevent small farmers from selling raw milk.
> 
> On farmers selling raw milk, what else do they sell, when the dairy truck comes along and farmers empty their milk tanks into it, is it pasturized then? No the dairy pasturizes it. When wheat leaves a farm is it made into bread already? no. Or corn do farmers turn it into corn flakes? no. Produce leaves the farm raw. It's up to the buyer to do what they want with it, whether it's a mega-corporation, or old grandma Jones from down the street. It isn't up to government to try to regulate that. The buyer is responsible ". If some one wants to buy raw milk from a farm, so be it, it's not the farmers responsibility to see to it they pasturize it. He only produces the raw product. That's like telling a lumber jack the tree he cuts down has to be used for lumber not paper. He doesn't care, he only cuts them down some one else processes them.


Interesting that you cite Austria as a country with little government intervention, when they have mandatory military service for everyone.
The examples you cite are unfinished products sold to processors. There are standards and inspections at most levels of production. That is a good thing. 
Admittedly, as farming progressed, standards for quality have changed. Milking into an open bucket isn't allowed for milk going to consumers. Stainless steel and glass are plumbing requirements for milk handling. That improved milk quality, but made such improvements in small dairies more difficult. But, for the sake of discussion, if those improvements hadn't pressured the small dairy out, the slim profit of milk requires you to get big, full time or get out. Not just dairies. Efficiencies of scale impact everything. Many dairies went away because no one wanted to live like grandpa, dawn to dark, 7 days a week, no TV, one old car, grow most of your food because you sure couldn't afford to buy it. But feel free to blame it on milkhouse size if that suits you.
You might want to brush up on the history of food safety over the past 150 years. You might gain a better understanding of what the public demands in food safety.:kiss:


----------



## haypoint

Here's the latest news/setback for raw milk advocates. 
 Illinois targets raw milk sales Kurt Erickson Times Bureau The Quad-City Times 
September 16, 2014 1:30 pm &#8226; Kurt Erickson Times Bureau

SPRINGFIELD &#8212; State health regulators are moving forward with plans that could make it tougher to produce and buy unpasteurized milk in Illinois.
In a move that has drawn the ire of raw milk producers, the Illinois Department of Public Health says rules are needed to prevent people who drink unpasteurized milk from getting sick.
"Our goal is to reduce the risk of illness from unpasteurized milk &#8212; not create a burden on dairy farmers," Public Health spokeswoman Melaney Arnold said. "We want to set sanitary requirements and quality standards for raw milk producers in order to ensure the product is as safe as it can be."
Donna O'Shaughnessy and her husband own a farm in Livingston County which serves about 100 customers who trek from hours away each month to buy raw milk produced by their 10 cows.
Her customers say drinking the unpasteurized liquid provides benefits to those who have allergies and other health problems.
O'Shaughnessy said the proposed rules would require her to invest in expensive equipment, open her operation to inspectors and hand over lists of the names and addresses of their customers.
"The rules," said O'Shaughnessy, "are not based on logic."
Public health officials say many of the rules provide a roadmap to ensuring people don't get ill from bacteria and other pathogens.
For example, one provision notes, "The flanks, udders, bellies and tails of all lactating dairy animals shall be free from visible dirt. The udders and teats of all lactating dairy animals shall be clean and dry before milking. Teats shall be treated with a sanitizing solution just prior to the time of milking and shall be dry before milking."
Arnold said the agency doesn't know how many producers the proposed rules might affect because there currently is no permitting system. But Jim Fraley, manager of the Bloomington-based Illinois Milk Producers Association, said there are about 60 farms that make raw milk available to residents.
Fraley said the milk producers support selling pasteurized milk but also understand there are some people who want raw milk.
"If people want to buy raw milk, that's great," said Fraley, who sat on the panel that helped negotiate the rules. "But we also want to preserve milk's image. Pasteurization has saved so many lives over the years."
Despite his general support of the rules, Fraley said he thinks there are some changes that could be made to lessen the impact on producers. For example, the proposed rules ban producers from offering up shares of a cow, which would give the buyers the ability to receive a portion of that animal's milk.
Groups including the Illinois State Medical Society say raw milk is simply too risky to drink. In a recent letter, medical society President Dr. William McDade wrote that milk should be pasteurized, a process in which milk is heated to a high temperature and then cooled to eliminate bacteria.
"The medical society believes allowing for the sale of unpasteurized raw milk to consumers in Illinois in any form puts the public at considerable risk and should not be allowed," McDade wrote.
O'Shaughnessy and a group of other raw milk farmers sat in on meetings with public health during the run-up to the release of the rules. But after roughly a year of talks, she said, raw milk supporters realized the rules weren't going their way.
She said the regulations that resulted from the talks are "insanity."
The proposed rules are now under review by a special legislative panel that will decide in the coming months whether to endorse the changes or send them back to the agency for further review.


----------



## Ziptie

I wish people would try to stop saving us from ourselves. Make a disclosure about all the bad/nastyness of raw milk. Every time someone wants to pick up some they have to read and sign.

I guess the problem would be the government can't make all that extra money on the rules and regs.

-Just no cure for stupid.:teehee:


----------



## haypoint

Ziptie said:


> I wish people would try to stop saving us from ourselves. Make a disclosure about all the bad/nastyness of raw milk. Every time someone wants to pick up some they have to read and sign.
> 
> I guess the problem would be the government can't make all that extra money on the rules and regs.
> 
> -Just no cure for stupid.:teehee:


Pretty sure the government isn't gaining any money on any extra rules or regulations for milk. To some it is saving you from yourself, to others it is having as safe a food supply as reasonably possible. The risks of commercially available raw milk are high. The standards for commercial milk, destined for pasteurization, are high.
You are right, no cure for stupid.


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> Here's the latest news/setback for raw milk advocates.
> Groups including the Illinois State Medical Society say raw milk is simply too risky to drink. In a recent letter, medical society President Dr. William McDade wrote that milk should be pasteurized, a process in which milk is heated to a high temperature and then cooled to eliminate bacteria.
> "The medical society believes allowing for the sale of unpasteurized raw milk to consumers in Illinois in any form puts the public at considerable risk and should not be allowed," McDade wrote.


Since only about 20% of MDs are members of the AMA and State associations the organizations don't represent the majority of doctors. Dr. McDade's opinion is just that, his opinion.


----------



## haypoint

SueMc said:


> Since only about 20% of MDs are members of the AMA and State associations the organizations don't represent the majority of doctors. Dr. McDade's opinion is just that, his opinion.


Do you think his opinion runs counter to the majority of MD in IL? Do you think that a majority of Doctors are in favor of commercial sales of raw milk in IL? Looks to me he is the medical authority the state is listening to. Could it be McDade's opinion mirrors the vast majority of doctors in IL?


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> Do you think his opinion runs counter to the majority of MD in IL? Do you think that a majority of Doctors are in favor of commercial sales of raw milk in IL? Looks to me he is the medical authority the state is listening to. Could it be McDade's opinion mirrors the vast majority of doctors in IL?


I have not seen anything published that says what the majority of doctor's opinions are. I'm just showing that a source that you post as expert on the subject speaks for an organization that is not even supported by peers in the profession. 
I do have an idea that the majority of people everywhere believe that pasteurized milk is the only safe milk to drink, but I bet the majority of that majority completely believe what they are told without investigating anything themselves...on most any issue.
I also think that a few here like to beat this dead horse (cow) to death...over and over. Some of the same people go mute when it is pointed out that many of those horrible raw milk diseases also show up in "safe", inspected food sources. For example, Listeria is often used as a raw milk boogyman, while trying to ignore (or at least not discuss) that listeria in hot dogs, deli meat, and cantaloupe have been big problems. It's not just raw milk.
Quote from the CDC:
The *largest* listeriosis outbreak in U.S. history occurred in 2011, when 147 illnesses, 33 deaths, and 1 miscarriage occurred among residents of 28 states; the outbreak was associated with consumption of cantaloupe from a single farm.

When these conversations go on I'm always reminded of something one of the members here said. That comment (not exact quote) was that if people saw the milk filter(s) in a commercial milk line they would want pasteurized milk. I see my filters twice a day and see nothing but milk. That combined with milk from tested, disease free animals gives me much greater confidence in my product than that from the store.


----------



## unregistered358967

I no longer live in CA but when I did, the entire time I was there I was able to drink raw milk. It was hands-down, fantastic. It gave me no stomach issues like pasteurized milk does. I really miss it.

Now, the only form I can get it in is cheese made from raw milk.


----------



## PrettyPaisley

Have you taken a peak at the realmilk.com site? Even if raw milk is legal for pet consumption only, many farmers do sell it for pets. Also, if you check out any local "know your farms" type tours you might find a dairy that sells for pets but isn't listed on that site. Contact your local WAPF chapter - they know the farmers who sell raw milk for pets, or for humans if that's legal in your state.


----------



## unregistered358967

Thanks PP - I do need to research more.  I know in MN it's not allowed to be sold in stores and I imagine I'd have to jump through hoops. In the meantime I shut up and drink my hemp milk and hope I don't have to do a drug test. Just kidding. I know the difference. I've asked the farmer (s) we get our meat from and they're pretty silent on the whole issue.. ahem.


----------



## arabian knight

And this is coming down the pike for next year. The Food and Drug Administration is proposing the revised rules Friday. The FDA is tweaking earlier proposals that included water and soil quality standards for farms big and small.
And sure the amount of folks that got sick from raw milk but there are so FEW drinking the stuff the illnesses are low.
But if the entire country were to be drinking raw milk that number would be astronomically higher.


----------



## haypoint

Saying that other foods, not just raw milk, cause Listeria illnesses, isn't much of a reccomendation, is it? If you think nothing was done about the Listeria in Cantaloupes, you need to talk to the two brothers that are sitting in prison for knowingly marketing those cantaloupes. Outbreaks like that harmed every cantaloupe grower. Just as contaminated spinich wiped out many farms that had perfectly clean products. Raw milk illnesses impack the whole milk business. Why let a tiny segment (raw milk) harm the markets of the rest of the family dairy farms?
You may think this is beating a dead horse. Re-read the title. Don't read if you don't want to know. But if you want to properly research what you feed your family, as is suggested, then check this thread from time to time. I will post each verified illness caused by milk. I can't post the unreported illnesses or the illnesses that raw milk was only suspected. But the small fraction that are reported and proven raw milk illness outbreaks, keeps this thrread growing.


----------



## SueMc

Today starts the 45 day comment period regarding IL raw milk rule changes. If interested, there is a link in the article to submit comments to the IDPH:

http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/news_wp/?p=16205


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> Why let a tiny segment (raw milk) harm the markets of the rest of the family dairy farms?


That is the base of all of this too but not the way you imply. 

Government agencies don't care about the yours or anyone else's health as much as they care about the opinions of dairy lobbyists and money and votes from those they represent. Milk/dairy sales have decreased 25% since the 70's, so competition, no matter how small, is worth stamping out. Using scare tactics about raw milk is as good as way as any to get rid of the competition. 
A good example of killing any competition has happened in our local Amish community. There are many Grade A dairies who sell to one company. Many of the dairies used to sell raw from their tanks if you brought your own container. They had to stop the practice after the milk company threatened to stop doing business with anyone who continued the practice. Needless to say all the Amish stopped selling raw. The sales of raw milk was likely pretty small but as one Amish producer said, one gallon of milk sold off the farm is a gallon not sold at the store.

It's all about money. It usually is. Anyone who believes otherwise should do a little research on what runs and ruins a market.


----------



## arabian knight

And rightfully so, anytime you SELL raw milk to the Public it better be looked at and inspected by the USDA. Drink ALL you want from YOUR OWN cows, but selling it to the public is a whole different set of circumstances.


----------



## haypoint

If I were selling a thousand gallons a day to Michigan Milk Producers and sold a single gallon of raw milk to someone that got sick from Listeria, Campylobactor, Salmanilla, or e Coli, how does that reflect on Michigan Milk Producers? Will the news cause a loss in sales? Darn tootin' it will.
What would the outcry be when a bunch of folks get sick and your elected officials paved the way to allowing commercial raw milk sales? You might want to research states that have allowed raw milk sales and the up tick of reported raw milk related illnesses.


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> If I were selling a thousand gallons a day to Michigan Milk Producers and sold a single gallon of raw milk to someone that got sick from Listeria, Campylobacter, Salmonella, or e Coli, how does that reflect on Michigan Milk Producers? Will the news cause a loss in sales? Darn tootin' it will.
> What would the outcry be when a bunch of folks get sick and your elected officials paved the way to allowing commercial raw milk sales? You might want to research states that have allowed raw milk sales and the up tick of reported raw milk related illnesses.


Why not require that herds are free from all of those diseases in the first place and not just depend on pasteurization to clean up the mess. I'll tell you why. It's money again. Rather than required disease free milk be sold to the public, pasteurized or raw, commercial herds can just be certified by the percent of infection in the herd. That is if the herds are certified at all.


----------



## haypoint

SueMc said:


> Why not require that commercial herds are free from all of those diseases in the first place and not just depend on pasteurization to clean up the mess. I'll tell you why. It's money again. Rather than required disease free milk be sold to the public, pasteurized or raw, commercial herds can just be certified by the percent of infection in the herd. That is if the herds are certified at all.


 You are right it is about money. Testing each cow, daily, for just the top ten virus or bacteria outbreaks is more costly than anyone wants to spend. Is there anyone in the commercial raw milk business interested in testing every cow or every bucket or even each bulk tank for a list of common diseases? Nope. Clearly, testing isn't a feasable way to protect the public. Gosh, I wish they still taught food safety history in schools. A foundation of history goes a long way towards understanding current food regulations.


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> You are right it is about money. Testing each cow, daily, for just the top ten virus or bacteria outbreaks is more costly than anyone wants to spend. Is there anyone in the commercial raw milk business interested in testing every cow or every bucket or even each bulk tank for a list of common diseases? Nope. Clearly, testing isn't a feasable way to protect the public. Gosh, I wish they still taught food safety history in schools. A foundation of history goes a long way towards understanding current food regulations.


I agree on the importance of knowing food safety history and enacting regulations that prevent rotten meat or contaminated anything being dumped in the grocery stores. The problem is, using the same broad brush to include a food product that many people know to be safe or are willing to take whatever risks (real or fictional) that might be associated with the product .
My objection is making the threat of illness _a scare tactic_ to run out any competition. 
It's like the title of Judge Judy's book: 
Don't Pee On My Leg And Tell Me It's Raining

As has been said many times over and over, if you don't want to drink raw milk then don't drink it. Let other's make their own choice.


----------



## haypoint

SueMc said:


> I agree on the importance of knowing food safety history and enacting regulations that prevent rotten meat or contaminated anything being dumped in the grocery stores. The problem is, using the same broad brush to include a food product that many people know to be safe or are willing to take whatever risks (real or fictional) that might be associated with the product .
> My objection is making the threat of illness _a scare tactic_ to run out any competition.
> It's like the title of Judge Judy's book:
> Don't Pee On My Leg And Tell Me It's Raining
> 
> As has been said many times over and over, if you don't want to drink raw milk then don't drink it. Let other's make their own choice.


Why in the world should there be an exclusion for a product known to be a great medium for bacteria and carries diseases? Nearly everything in the food chain must follow food safety regulations. If you don't want that grow or milk your own.
Read all this post. Those are facts, not scare tactics, not fiction. If that threatens how you view the world, don't read it. But for those open minded and willing to learn, it is available.:thumb:


----------



## SueMc

Of course it's scare tactics. It would be horrible PR for the industry to admit that it is working hard to run the competition out of business especially when many of those are small farmers/dairy business owners. Prairie Farms, Dean and the rest of them would look bad in the press. Can't have that.
It's so much easier to announce from the rooftops that everything is being done in the name of public health and safety. It does look so much better when the product is villainized rather than company motives.

Just for the record, I've owned and milked either dairy goats or cows since 1979 and only sold goat milk once to an animal rescuer who was raising twin whitetails, so I do provide for my family. I do sell livestock and always have but am not interested in selling milk, eggs or any other product.
I decided a long time ago that I wasn't interested in dealing with someone suing me because they got a snotty nose after eating an egg from me. I certainly do support the right of anyone else who wants to buy and sell. I especially detest big business/industry trying to run out anyone who causes them to lose a dollar.

Sorry, but I can't seriously :facepalm: address the subject of open mindedness with you:hysterical:


----------



## haypoint

95% of the Dairies in Michigan are family owned operations. These families depend on the public getting a safe healthy product. The less than one percent of raw milk sales threatens these families abilitty to make a living.
You and i agree on milking your own cows and drinking your own cow's milk. If you get sick, too bad. But don't take your erroneous belief that raw milk is heathier and promote commercialazation of it and cause harm to the families that depend on a milk check.


----------



## haley1

How many dairy farms have died from drinking raw milk? We did not die or even get sick from growing up drinking raw milk when growing up. The dairy always took samples when they picked up the milk and the reports always showed the cell counts were always good. My dad always had very healthy cows and never used antibiotics.


----------



## SueMc

haypoint said:


> But don't take your erroneous belief that raw milk is heathier and promote commercialazation of it and cause harm to the families that depend on a milk check.


You need to reread. I have not said that raw milk is healthier nor have I ever said that I promote commercialization. I promote the idea that turning buying and selling milk into a legal issue is ridiculous.
As usual, time, energy and money wasted by the government entities involved.


----------



## arabian knight

haley1 said:


> How many dairy farms have died from drinking raw milk? We did not die or even get sick from growing up drinking raw milk when growing up. The dairy always took samples when they picked up the milk and the reports always showed the cell counts were always good. My dad always had very healthy cows and never used antibiotics.


 The problem lies in the major population did not grow up on raw milk and their immune system is NOT LIKE YOURS. Or those that still drink raw milk today. and THAT is where the problem is, the General Population WILL get Sick from untreated milk if their immune systems have not grown up on farms. And that then is where the Government should and Does step in to Protect the General Population ~ Period~!
And then the law suits will fly like they have never done before and many of the so called good folks that sell raw milk will be OUT of their farms and the General Population will OWN them along with a plethora of Lawyers~!


----------



## SueMc

arabian knight said:


> The problem lies in the major population did not grow up on raw milk and their immune system is NOT LIKE YOURS. Or those that still drink raw milk today. and THAT is where the problem is, the General Population WILL get Sick from untreated milk if their immune systems have not grown up on farms.


I can understand that this is your opinion but since it looks like it is posted as FACT, what do you have in the way of studies, scientific lit., etc., that backs such a statement up?


----------



## Molly Mckee

My DH and I both grew up drinking raw milk. Our kids drank raw milk as well. 
The milk all came from neighbors/relatives grade A dairies in WI. The farms were very clean and you could do surgery or eat off the parlor and milk room floors. We moved to TX and now live in WA. I have yet to see a farm I would drink the milk from. There must be some, but I haven't seen them. I don't know if it is the difference in times or the locations but a clean barn here does not come close to a Grade A dairy barn in WI.


----------



## haley1

arabian knight said:


> The problem lies in the major population did not grow up on raw milk and their immune system is NOT LIKE YOURS. Or those that still drink raw milk today. and THAT is where the problem is, the General Population WILL get Sick from untreated milk if their immune systems have not grown up on farms. And that then is where the Government should and Does step in to Protect the General Population ~ Period~!
> And then the law suits will fly like they have never done before and many of the so called good folks that sell raw milk will be OUT of their farms and the General Population will OWN them along with a plethora of Lawyers~!



Yes and that is a huge problem, not having people build their system naturally and all the chemical disenfectants and fake poison laden shots


----------



## arabian knight

The US population is now over 300 Million. You are NOT going to teach that amount of people to change. You just are not. And this country is sue happy that is just a fact of live.
This is not the 1900's anymore. So no sense living like that either.


----------



## arabian knight

SueMc said:


> I can understand that this is your opinion but since it looks like it is posted as FACT, what do you have in the way of studies, scientific lit., etc., that backs such a statement up?


No it doesn't. These stats are from a Very Small Sample of people that actually drank raw milk. 
You put raw milk into the hands of the general 300 Million population, those stats that some are so much behind will now Go Up. Because the Sample then is the General Population, not just a handful, WHO probably had pretty strong immune systems to start with.

You can't fool nature and the way people have gown up now for Generations those immune system are long gone and are weak.
Look how many can't even go into a store without wiping the handle on the shopping cart down with a Antiseptic Whip. (Which is supplied by the store).~!
Folks just are not living like they did 100 years ago. the kids don't play on dirt playgrounds.
Heck I swam in a river that cows crossed up stream no big deal, but the Majority of parents today would not be caught letting their kids in such a river.
Those same kids now swim in heavy chlorinated pools and shower after they get done e4etc.
Society is not like it was 100 years ago and you are not join got change what now is generations of scrubbing down everything with antibacterial soaps etc.

That is what you selling to the general population raw milk face. And sue happy folks with ambulance chasing lawyers.


----------



## haypoint

I've been accused of posting my opinions without any data. Here's a bunch of info from a study:
A 2013 paper (Claeys WL, Cardoen S, Daube G, et al: Raw or heated cow milk consumption: Review of risks and benefits. Food Control 2013;
31(1): 251-62) is available at
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.035>. It addresses the arguments that pasteurization removes significant nutrients from milk.

The abstract, introduction, and conclusions are given below with the citations removed.

"Abstract
---------
"In the context of the prevailing trend toward more natural products, there seems to be an increasing preference for raw milk consumption as raw milk is associated with several perceived health benefits that are believed to be destroyed upon heating. However, many human pathogens can be isolated from raw cow milk. The prevalence of foodborne pathogens in raw cow milk varies, but their presence has been demonstrated in many surveys, and foodborne infections have been repeatedly reported for _Campylobacter_, _Salmonella_ spp., and human pathogenic verocytotoxin-producing _Escherichia coli_ [VTEC]. In industrialized countries, milk-borne and milk product-borne outbreaks represent 2-6 percent of the bacterial foodborne outbreaks.

"The aim of this review is to present scientifically sound data regarding the risks and benefits related to the consumption of raw and heated cow milk. Both microbiological aspects (such as the prevalence of milk-borne pathogens, pathogen growth inhibition by antimicrobial systems and by lactic acid producing bacteria, probiotic bacteria, etc.), and nutritional or health aspects (nutritional value, immunity, allergies, lactose intolerance, diabetes, milk digestibility, etc.) are considered.

"As such, it is demonstrated that consumption of raw milk poses a realistic health threat due to a possible contamination with human pathogens. It is therefore strongly recommended that milk should be heated before consumption. With the exception of an altered organoleptic profile [taste], heating (in particular ultra high temperature and similar treatments) will not substantially change the nutritional value of raw milk or other benefits associated with raw milk consumption.

"Introduction
-------------
"The consumption of raw milk is not well-documented, but in the context of the current trend toward 'consuming natural' and 'purchasing locally,' raw milk consumption is becoming more popular.
This is nourished by the perception that heating destroys the nutritional and health benefits of milk, and can even induce some detrimental effects. However, due to its high nutritional value together with the neutral pH and high water activity [content?], raw milk serves as an excellent growth medium for different micro-organisms, whose multiplication depends mainly on temperature and on competing micro-organisms and their metabolic products. In order to guarantee its microbial safety and to prolong its shelf-life, milk is heat treated.

"The impact of milk pasteurization on public health can be clearly illustrated by means of historical data. Before 1938, an estimated 25 percent of all foodborne and waterborne disease outbreaks in the USA were associated with milk, whereas nowadays, the percentage of such outbreaks associated with milk is estimated to be below 1 percent.
Between 1880 and 1907, 29 milk-borne outbreaks were reported on average each year in the USA. With the adoption of pasteurization in 1938, milk-borne diseases dropped to only 46 outbreaks during the 19-year period from 1973 to 1992, corresponding to an average of 2.4 outbreaks each year. A recent report of the USA CDC indicates that the vast majority of milk-borne outbreaks in the USA are in states that permit the sale of raw milk. In England and Wales, the great majority of milk-borne outbreaks during the 1980s were attributed to the consumption of raw milk. In Scotland, a similar situation existed until the sale of unpasteurized milk was prohibited in 1983, which led to a significant drop of the incidence of diseases related to liquid milk consumption.

"In the mid-20th century, the main illnesses associated with raw milk consumption were brucellosis and tuberculosis. These have been eradicated as milk-borne diseases in developed countries, mainly through herd certification programs which included culling of infected animals, the installation of refrigerated bulk tanks for milk collection on farms, and the introduction of pasteurization. In the past, pasteurization conditions were standardized based on the destruction of _Mycobacterium bovis_, a relatively heat-resistant non-sporogenic bacterium that formerly was among the most serious pathogenic bacteria present in milk. Pasteurization standards today are based upon the destruction of _Coxiella burnetii_, the most heat-resistant milk-borne zoonotic pathogen known. In the past 30 years, several previously unrecognized foodborne bacterial infections, including infection with _Campylobacter jejuni_, _Listeria monocytogenes_, and _Escherichia coli_ strain O157 (or more general verocytotoxin-producing pathogenic _E. coli_ [VTEC]), have emerged as significant causes of human morbidity and mortality. Pathogens mainly present in raw milk today are, among others, _C. jejuni_, _Salmonella_ spp., _Staphylococcus aureus_, _Listeria monocytogenes_, pathogenic _E. coli_, and _Yersinia enterocolitica_.

"In Europe, the current regulatory microbial criteria for raw cow milk are less than or equal to 100 000 colony forming units (cfu)/ml for plate count (at 30 deg C/86 deg F) and less than or equal to 400 000 cfu/ml for somatic cells, as is stipulated in Regulation (EC) 853/2004 laying down specific hygiene rules on the hygiene of foodstuffs. In this Regulation, health requirements for production animals and hygienic requirements on milk production holdings (such as regarding premises and equipment, hygiene during milking, collection, and transport, staff hygiene) are established as well. In general, raw milk intended for human consumption must meet the requirements of the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) 178/2002) and be free of pathogens.
Even though improvements in hygiene resulted in routine production of raw cow milk with less than 20 000 cfu (total flora)/ml), this does not guarantee raw milk to be free of pathogens. In approximately 1-6 percent of the human outbreaks reported in developed countries, milk has been identified as the vehicle of infection. An overview of foodborne disease reports from different industrialized countries indicates that milk and milk products are implicated in 1-5 percent of the total bacterial foodborne outbreaks, with 39.1 percent attributed to milk, 53.1 percent to cheese, and 7.8 percent to other milk products.

"Whereas milk quality and safety has been the topic of many research studies, raw milk still continues to be an issue for debate, which is primarily held on the internet where often non-scientifically based information circulates. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the risks and benefits related to the consumption of raw cow milk at one hand, and to evaluate the effect of heat treatments of milk on these risks and benefits on the other hand, considering the microbiological as well as the nutritional (health) aspects.

"Conclusions
------------
"In this evaluation it is clearly demonstrated that the consumption of raw milk poses a realistic and unnecessary health threat because of its possible contamination with pathogenic bacteria. It is therefore recommended to heat [raw] milk before consumption, especially when served to young children, pregnant women, or any person suffering from a chronic disease or a suppressed immune system. In this context the attention is drawn to raw milk provided on farms to the general public (such as during a school visit) and raw milk distributors allowing the automatic supply of raw milk from a bulk reservoir to the consumer.

"Historical data show that the pasteurization of milk has led to improved public health, and more recent data on occasional raw milk consumption indicate the hazard of bacterial infections, which could be avoided by a heat treatment. At present, thermal treatment remains the most frequently used and most effective method to increase the microbiological safety of milk without substantially changing the nutritional value of milk or other benefits associated with raw milk consumption. Table 4 summarizes the main (claimed) benefits of raw milk consumption and the (claimed) detrimental effects of heating discussed in the present paper. Almost all arguments put forward by raw milk proponents for not heating milk, can be refuted, and the only substantial disadvantage of heating is the change in the organoleptic profile [taste] of milk. It is clear that this 'detrimental' effect of heating does not countervail the risk posed by raw milk consumption, namely of a milk-borne pathogen infection, which can have serious health consequences." - Mod.LL


----------



## Elevenpoint

I figure raw milk was a way of life.
So for me..a quart mason jar in the freezer of raw milk before eating is a way of life.
You should see how healthy my dogs are.
We drink 5 to 6 gallons a week.
The cats know what real cream is.


----------



## haypoint

elevenpoint said:


> I figure raw milk was a way of life.
> So for me..a quart mason jar in the freezer of raw milk before eating is a way of life.
> You should see how healthy my dogs are.
> We drink 5 to 6 gallons a week.
> The cats know what real cream is.


I've seen dogs eat a week old road kill fox and watched cats eat the digestive tract of a field mouse. Not sure I'd want to draw any conclusions on what's healthy for humans based on that.:yuck:


----------



## Elevenpoint

haypoint said:


> I've seen dogs eat a week old road kill fox and watched cats eat the digestive tract of a field mouse. Not sure I'd want to draw any conclusions on what's healthy for humans based on that.:yuck:


Worse yet...dogs have raw fresh eggs all the time too.
Prettiest mountain curs in the Ozarks...vet said so.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

haypoint said:


> I've seen dogs eat a week old road kill fox and watched cats eat the digestive tract of a field mouse. Not sure I'd want to draw any conclusions on what's healthy for humans based on that.:yuck:


I used to have a dog that would bury squirrels in the yard and then let them "age" a week before he ate them


----------



## arabian knight

haypoint said:


> I've seen dogs eat a week old road kill fox and watched cats eat the digestive tract of a field mouse. Not sure I'd want to draw any conclusions on what's healthy for humans based on that.:yuck:


There is NOT one thing even close between What a Dog and digest and handle and what a Human Being can. NONE~! Humans just can't handle bad germs Period.
And sure there are SOME that have grown UP on a farm and have drank raw milk all this eyes but the General Population HAS NOT~!~
And their immune systems just CAN'T HANDLE it. And that is what is at stake here. Want to lose your farm after selling raw milk to THOSE that just have not built their immune system up and is strong enough to cope with such stuff?
Want to risk losing everything you have worked for in a law suit? It Just is Not Worth it these days. And especially all the immigrates now that have come in this country that have even lower immune systems from other parts of the world. WOW some sure want to play with fire just to make a few bucks in a highly risky area as this.
Pasteurization was put in place for a Very Good Reason~!
Want to drink raw milk from YOUR OWN Cows. Go Right Ahead. Not one person wants to stop YOU from doing it. But Don't risk the health of those that have not been-brought up on raw milk. As In The General Population.


----------



## Elevenpoint

Just a way of life.
Plus only butter...as many fresh eggs I want to eat..sugar for anything.
Raw organic fresh eating.
Guess why my weight has not changed in 35 years.


----------



## Farmerga

The point is not if raw milk is safe, healthy, better, etc, the point is that government should not prohibit its sale. They can require labels, sure, but, not prohibition.


----------



## haypoint

Farmerga said:


> The point is not if raw milk is safe, healthy, better, etc, the point is that government should not prohibit its sale. They can require labels, sure, but, not prohibition.


A while back, there were no inspections or standards for food. But over the past 80 years, we have lots of safety measures. The general public seems to want/expect safe food. Meat is so safe that when there is a problem, even a problem so small that a good hot fry pan could solve, a million pounds of burger is recalled and it is such a rare event it garners national news coverage.
It isn't the big bad food processing giants that are tainting our food. Whole Foods and Trader Joes have more recalled food than anyone. 

The point is that when you offer food for sale in the public food chain, you better expect restrictions. Some would have you believe it is the government trying to control your food. If that were true herd shares would be illegal. The differentiation here is public food chain.

Those that operate dairies must produce a wholesome product. But since a variety of bacteria exist in the milk inside a cow, expecting zero bacteria is unrealistic. So there are standards that must be met. As a further safeguard, the milk is processed in a way to kill that bacteria. 

When you enter the public food chain, with a product, raw milk, that contains varying amounts of bacteria, e coli, listeria, campylobacter, etc. and it leaves your control, how will you defend yourself, family and farm when poorly handled raw milk hospitalizes a child?

Do you think a label that says, "Raw Milk, may contain bacteria and disease that could result in liver failure, paralysis or death" really protect you from a jury of people sympathetic to the child you sickened? Do you think that if you bought raw milk, saw the label and poisoned your bedridden spouse, that you'd be, " Oh well, I guess they warned me." No, you'll want to shut them down and send everyone involved to prison.


----------



## Farmerga

haypoint said:


> A while back, there were no inspections or standards for food. But over the past 80 years, we have lots of safety measures. The general public seems to want/expect safe food. Meat is so safe that when there is a problem, even a problem so small that a good hot fry pan could solve, a million pounds of burger is recalled and it is such a rare event it garners national news coverage.
> It isn't the big bad food processing giants that are tainting our food. Whole Foods and Trader Joes have more recalled food than anyone.
> 
> The point is that when you offer food for sale in the public food chain, you better expect restrictions. Some would have you believe it is the government trying to control your food. If that were true herd shares would be illegal. The differentiation here is public food chain.
> 
> Those that operate dairies must produce a wholesome product. But since a variety of bacteria exist in the milk inside a cow, expecting zero bacteria is unrealistic. So there are standards that must be met. As a further safeguard, the milk is processed in a way to kill that bacteria.
> 
> When you enter the public food chain, with a product, raw milk, that contains varying amounts of bacteria, e coli, listeria, campylobacter, etc. and it leaves your control, how will you defend yourself, family and farm when poorly handled raw milk hospitalizes a child?
> 
> Do you think a label that says, "Raw Milk, may contain bacteria and disease that could result in liver failure, paralysis or death" really protect you from a jury of people sympathetic to the child you sickened? Do you think that if you bought raw milk, saw the label and poisoned your bedridden spouse, that you'd be, " Oh well, I guess they warned me." No, you'll want to shut them down and send everyone involved to prison.


First off, don't tell me what I want. Secondly, I am fully aware of the vast government over reach described as the food safety system, I have worked in it. A label is fine, with freedom comes risks and the government is not there to eliminate risk. I am not saying that Raw milk should replace pasteurized milk, I am saying that government hasn't the right to restrict the sale of raw milk beyond requiring labeling.


----------



## DisasterCupcake

Lots of foods pose a risk. Sushi, pork, red meat, poultry, shellfish, raw vegetables, lettuce...

Should those also be banned from sale to the public? Or only if they are suitably washed, cooked, prepared, etc.

Jw..


----------



## greg273

So 'Mountain Dew', Yellow No.5, apples with Captan residues, are ok, raw milk, not so much. You know why that stuff is ok?? Because it makes certain well-connected interests a LOT of money. The raw milk lobby just needs to buy a few Congressmen like the rest of industry and they'll be alright. 
I can walk into a store right now, and buy enough Wild Turkey to kill myself and 10 cartons of smokes, but somehow 'the government' thinks it needs to protect us from raw milk. They've got their priorties a little screwed up, and it mostly boils down to who can afford the best lawyers and lobbyists. 
If you want raw milk, get a goat, a cow, or strike up a relationship with someone who does. The government doesn't even have to be involved.


----------



## SueMc

arabian knight said:


> There is NOT one thing even close between What a Dog and digest and handle and what a Human Being can. NONE~!
> 
> *While I agree with this for the most part, I have never had a dog that could eat a hot dog without throwing it up soon afterward.
> *
> 
> Humans just can't handle bad germs Period.
> 
> *That is absolutely not true. The human race would have been extinct a long time ago if it were.*


There will always be controversy concerning raw milk. What is really annoying about these threads are posters who try to intimidate those who choose raw milk while continuing to ignore or downplay the melons, deli meats, etc that have sickened and killed people with some of the same bacteria.


----------



## greg273

SueMc said:


> There will always be controversy concerning raw milk. What is really annoying about these threads are posters who try to intimidate those who choose raw milk while continuing to ignore or downplay the melons, deli meats, etc that have sickened and killed people with some of the same bacteria.


 Some of those same posters routinely douse their GMO fields with toxic herbicides and pesticides, contaminating the air, water, and DNA sequences, and don't give it a second thought. 
No doubt raw milk can be a bacterial breeding ground, but it can also be a healthy nourishing food. Buyer beware. Even if it was offered for sale in a store, I'd be hesitant to purchase it... We've gotten ours straight from the milk coolers of a local dairyman, on the barter system. And before that, it was raw goats milk right from the milk pail. No government or third party necessary. Obviously that doesn't work for 'the masses', who are probably better off getting pasteurized milk.


----------



## haypoint

SueMc said:


> There will always be controversy concerning raw milk. What is really annoying about these threads are posters who try to intimidate those who choose raw milk while continuing to ignore or downplay the melons, deli meats, etc that have sickened and killed people with some of the same bacteria.


Start a thread on the dangers of melons or deli meats, if that's what concerns you. This thread is about people that got sick after drinking raw milk.

Same class of bacteria, but not the exact bacteria. 

BTW, the guys involved in the contaminated melons went to prison.


----------



## hoddedloki

Here is an apparently novel though for those who insist that Raw milk must be regulated. Let the people decide. Slap a label on the bottle and let people decide that if they want to buy raw milk. And if they get sick, than the warning label preempts lawsuits, since they knowingly assumed the risk. This should be neither rocket science nor a huge deal. Instead we have many who argue for state control of such a picayune things as how a glass of milk can be sold. Have some personal responsibility and let people make their own decisions, rather than trying to tell them what they can or cannot do.

Loki


----------



## haypoint

hoddedloki said:


> Here is an apparently novel though for those who insist that Raw milk must be regulated. Let the people decide. Slap a label on the bottle and let people decide that if they want to buy raw milk. And if they get sick, than the warning label preempts lawsuits, since they knowingly assumed the risk. This should be neither rocket science nor a huge deal. Instead we have many who argue for state control of such a picayune things as how a glass of milk can be sold. Have some personal responsibility and let people make their own decisions, rather than trying to tell them what they can or cannot do.
> 
> Loki


I think that has already happened. 
The USDA, CDC, EPA and every state Ag Dept are mandated by statute to set up regulations, standards and inspections to strive for a safe food supply. 
Those crafty pro-Raw Milk advocates have done an end run around regulation. Someone discovered that the government cares about the public health, they have a Darwin clause for those that want to sicken themselves. For milk it is called herd share. People are allowed to eat road kill, eat their own raw chicken and let their children play lawn darts.

So, as has always been the case, you and your family are free to drink raw milk from your cows. 

But don't expect to see raw milk in the local grocery store.

Recently, Michigan has made it easier for folks to market their jams, salsa, pickles and other low risk prepared foods. Just needs a label with ingredients and the disclaimer, "This product was prepared in a kitchen that is not inspected by MDA." Easy enough.

I'm pretty sure the Dairy industry isn't too worried over the .01% of the market lost to raw milk.


----------



## haypoint

Latest update, for those keeping up on this sort of thing:

 PUEBLO, Colo. - A ranch in Pueblo County is being investigated as the source of a food poisoning outbreak in Pueblo and El Paso counties, according to health officials. 
According to a joint news release from El Paso County Public Health and the Pueblo City-County Health Department, health officials have identified 12 confirmed and eight probable human cases of campylobacter since August 1.
All of the victims said they were sickened after drinking raw milk from Larga Vista Ranch in Pueblo County. 

Health officials warn that drinking unpasteurized milk can pose severe health risks. They say there is no method to insure the safety of raw milk.
175 people who participate in Larga Vista's cow share operation have been notified not to drink the milk. The program allows people to buy a share of a cow and in return receive raw, unpasteurized milk.
The sale of raw milk is illegal in Colorado and health officials say infants and young children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems are especially at risk of getting sick from drinking it.

http://www.krdo.com/news/pueblo/cam...to-raw-milk-from-pueblo-county-ranch/93065765


----------



## spiritbear

What doesn't get talked about a lot is that milk causes an average of 130,000 illnesses a year and 10% of all food related deaths are from milk. Those are from pasteurized milk. Those against raw milk would have you to believe pasteurized milk is safe but that is far from the truth.


----------



## arabian knight

haypoint said:


> Latest update, for those keeping up on this sort of thing:
> 
> PUEBLO, Colo. - A ranch in Pueblo County is being investigated as the source of a food poisoning outbreak in Pueblo and El Paso counties, according to health officials.
> According to a joint news release from El Paso County Public Health and the Pueblo City-County Health Department, health officials have identified 12 confirmed and eight probable human cases of campylobacter since August 1.
> All of the victims said they were sickened after drinking raw milk from Larga Vista Ranch in Pueblo County.
> 
> Health officials warn that drinking unpasteurized milk can pose severe health risks. They say there is no method to insure the safety of raw milk.
> 175 people who participate in Larga Vista's cow share operation have been notified not to drink the milk. The program allows people to buy a share of a cow and in return receive raw, unpasteurized milk.
> The sale of raw milk is illegal in Colorado and health officials say infants and young children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems are especially at risk of getting sick from drinking it.
> 
> http://www.krdo.com/news/pueblo/cam...to-raw-milk-from-pueblo-county-ranch/93065765


 Oh yes, and if the number of people that drink pasteurized milk were the same as those that drank unpasteurized, the number of people getting sick from unpasteurized milk would be Off The Charts it would be so high~!. 
But thank goodness only a handful of people drink the unpasteurized stuff so the numbers are low.
It is being pasteurized for the Health of the American people, simple as that.


----------



## haypoint

spiritbear said:


> What doesn't get talked about a lot is that milk causes an average of 130,000 illnesses a year and 10% of all food related deaths are from milk. Those are from pasteurized milk. Those against raw milk would have you to believe pasteurized milk is safe but that is far from the truth.


130,000 illnesses a year? From what? e coli? Campylobacter? Listeria? Mexican bathtub cheese? Did you include improperly handled milk after it was sold? Where did you get this 130,000 number? In the US? !0% of food deaths from milk? Pasteurized milk, in the US? I'd love to learn about this silent epidemic you speak of. Where can I get this information? Not some Raw Milk promotional web site, I hope.

Do you put improperly pasteurized milk in the category with raw milk or are you calling that pasteurized milk?

I tried to locate anything that might support your claim, all I found was this:http://www.milkfacts.info/Milk Microbiology/Disease Outbreaks.htm

I also searched 130,000 milk illness and got this :https://books.google.com/books?id=J...AB#v=onepage&q=130,000 illnesses milk&f=false
Try reading pages 255 and 256. It is an old out dated book.

130,000 cases of shigellosis from a variety of raw vegetables and milk products each year. Is that what you are quoting?


----------



## Agriculture

Farmerga said:


> First off, don't tell me what I want. Secondly, I am fully aware of the vast government over reach described as the food safety system, I have worked in it. A label is fine, with freedom comes risks and the government is not there to eliminate risk. I am not saying that Raw milk should replace pasteurized milk, I am saying that government hasn't the right to restrict the sale of raw milk beyond requiring labeling.


You, like most raw milk advocates are factually wrong. The government does have the right to restrict the sale of raw milk beyond labeling. They have given that right to themselves, and they use it. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but it is true, because they do it. This is a classic example of how many raw milk advocates skew things to fit their own beliefs and world view, despite the facts staring them right in the face.


----------



## spiritbear

haypoint said:


> 130,000 illnesses a year? From what? e coli? Campylobacter? Listeria? Mexican bathtub cheese? Did you include improperly handled milk after it was sold? Where did you get this 130,000 number? In the US? !0% of food deaths from milk? Pasteurized milk, in the US? I'd love to learn about this silent epidemic you speak of. Where can I get this information? Not some Raw Milk promotional web site, I hope.
> 
> Do you put improperly pasteurized milk in the category with raw milk or are you calling that pasteurized milk?
> 
> I tried to locate anything that might support your claim, all I found was this:http://www.milkfacts.info/Milk Microbiology/Disease Outbreaks.htm
> 
> I also searched 130,000 milk illness and got this :https://books.google.com/books?id=J...AB#v=onepage&q=130,000 illnesses milk&f=false
> Try reading pages 255 and 256. It is an old out dated book.
> 
> 130,000 cases of shigellosis from a variety of raw vegetables and milk products each year. Is that what you are quoting?


http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/19/3/pdfs/11-1866.pdf


----------



## haypoint

[QUOTE=spiritbear;7775204]http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/19/3/pdfs/11-1866.pdf[/QUOTE]

Thanks. From the web site you selected, "During 1998â2008, a total of 13,352 foodborne dis&shy;ease outbreaks, causing 271,974 illnesses,"
and
"Foods in this commodity are typically con&shy;sumed after pasteurization, which eliminates pathogens, but improper pasteurization and incidents of contamination after pasteurization occur (_25_). In our dataset, norovirus outbreaks associated with cheese illustrate the role of con&shy;tamination of dairy products after pasteurization by food handlers. Because of the large volume of dairy products consumed, even infrequent contamination of commercially distributed products can result in many illnesses The prominence of dairy in our model reflects a relatively high number of reported outbreaks associated with raw milk compared with the quantity of raw milk consumed (_27_) and issues related to _Campylobacter _spp. infection (discussed below); these factors likely resulted in an overestimation of illnesses attributed to dairy."
Do I need to add anything? Improper pasteurization, contamination after pasteurization and raw milk consumption are the factors found.


----------



## barnbilder

Government is always interested in the health of it's subjects. I believe that the government may have regulations against crystal meth as well. You wouldn't know it, judging from how many people are missing teeth at the wally world. Bottom teeth are usually just from government approved safe and healthy tobacco products, but the top front ones are usually a sure sign of meth use.


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> Government is always interested in the health of it's subjects. I believe that the government may have regulations against crystal meth as well. You wouldn't know it, judging from how many people are missing teeth at the wally world. Bottom teeth are usually just from government approved safe and healthy tobacco products, but the top front ones are usually a sure sign of meth use.


This is a thread about people getting sick from raw milk, mostly in the public food chain.
If you were selling crystal meth on the open market and a dozen folks ended up at the hospital, I think the "government" would be interested. Just as they apparently are when selling raw milk on the open market sends folks to the hospital.

While the use of Methamphetamines does cause dental woes, often missing teeth are due to a lack of dental care, a result of no dental insurance or funds for proper care. Therefore, screwed up teeth is a clearer indication of poverty than it is of drug use.

I'm sure a thread on meth users, stupid people, Wal mart shoppers, causes of bottom tooth rot vs missing top teeth or why the government permits the restricted, taxed sale of tobacco would be very interesting to some folks. If those are your interests, start a discussion.

But, as the title clearly states, don't read if you don't want to know.


----------



## Rick

haypoint said:


> This is a thread about people getting sick from raw milk, mostly in the public food chain.
> If you were selling crystal meth on the open market and a dozen folks ended up at the hospital, I think the "government" would be interested. Just as they apparently are when selling raw milk on the open market sends folks to the hospital.
> 
> While the use of Methamphetamines does cause dental woes, often missing teeth are due to a lack of dental care, a result of no dental insurance or funds for proper care. Therefore, screwed up teeth is a clearer indication of poverty than it is of drug use.
> 
> I'm sure a thread on meth users, stupid people, Wal mart shoppers, causes of bottom tooth rot vs missing top teeth or why the government permits the restricted, taxed sale of tobacco would be very interesting to some folks. If those are your interests, start a discussion.
> 
> But, as the title clearly states, don't read if you don't want to know.


If you don't want the tangent on dental issues and Meth use,don't reply!

Front teeth are highly unlikley to rot just because you eat sugar and don't brush them


----------



## DJ in WA

haypoint said:


> *Start a thread on the dangers of melons or deli meats, if that's what concerns you. This thread is about people that got sick after drinking raw milk.*
> 
> Same class of bacteria, but not the exact bacteria.
> 
> BTW, the guys involved in the contaminated melons went to prison.


I haven't been to General Chat for months and see you resurrected this thread.

Tell me, why don't you start threads on other health risks. Why do you single out raw milk?

Usually when I see someone cherry-picking the issues, there is motivation other than concern for health. If one was truly interested in health of the public, they would consider all the health risks.


----------



## Agriculture

DJ in WA said:


> Usually when I see someone cherry-picking the issues, there is motivation other than concern for health. If one was truly interested in health of the public, they would consider all the health risks.


Easy to say, but typical of the raw milk supporters, who can't justify their beliefs with science and facts, so they use every possible argument to try to discredit those who challenge them. There are many health issues which I'm concerned about, but I don't miss many opportunities to call out raw milk supporters either, because the danger is so obvious yet they just refuse to accept it, but mostly because many raw milk advocates also try to push their views and their poison on to others. Yea, I have a problem if a child gets seriously sick because it's mother followed some fantasy advice perpetuated by dreamers who can't face facts. As much as I hate smoking and smokers, few of them dare to claim that smoking won't hurt you and that you should try it and expose your children to it. If they did I'd be all over them too, but I live and let live unless they try to light up in my presence.


----------



## Michael W. Smith

greg273 said:


> We've gotten ours straight from the milk coolers of a local dairyman, on the barter system. And before that, it was raw goats milk right from the milk pail. No government or third party necessary.


Which is one of the reasons why government WANTS involved. It's not because of the safety of the general public - it's because the government isn't getting their cut.

You buy or barter with the farmer. The government gets nothing out of the deal - and they don't like that because they think they should get a percentage of EVERY transaction that occurs.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> I haven't been to General Chat for months and see you resurrected this thread.
> 
> Tell me, why don't you start threads on other health risks. Why do you single out raw milk?
> 
> Usually when I see someone cherry-picking the issues, there is motivation other than concern for health. If one was truly interested in health of the public, they would consider all the health risks.


Sorry, I didn't "resurrect this thread".

If you were as interested in reading this lengthy thread as you are in commenting on it, you'd see that is a collection of reports of confirmed reports of people sickened by drinking raw milk. When I happen across another confirmed report, I post it here. I think those that refuse to accept these facts, putting each report in a single thread is less irritating than a new thread on this topic ever time raw milk is proven to sicken a group of people. Conversely, to those that want to be kept informed, this single thread is one way to view recent events.

I see people deny the risks of raw milk and people that don't know the risks. While there have been health risks reported for contaminated strawberries, spinach, cantaloupes, etc. But I didn't hear people denying the health risk of those foods. They generally represent a break in the food safety system that is quickly taken care of. For example, a thread of recalls and/or hospitalizations of spinach would have no additional reports over the past few years. Raw milk illnesses hits the news every few months.

I don't resurrect this thread, confirmed illnesses caused by raw milk does. If this upsets you, please read the title and don't read this thread. I don't know how I could have made it more clear. 

Sometime in the future, I expect that I'll be posting another confirmed report on raw milk caused illnesses and that will bring this post to the top, again. I hope that you or your family are not in that report.


----------



## haypoint

Michael W. Smith said:


> Which is one of the reasons why government WANTS involved. It's not because of the safety of the general public - it's because the government isn't getting their cut.
> 
> You buy or barter with the farmer. The government gets nothing out of the deal - and they don't like that because they think they should get a percentage of EVERY transaction that occurs.


I realize lots of folks hate the government. At times, I share that suspicion. 
But I just don't see where the government "gets their cut" in milk safety.

Raw milk sales is such a tiny segment of total milk sales, it poses no threat to commercial milk production. In general terms, "the government" is assigned the task of insuring safe food to the public. I've seen no interest by "the government" in personal food production and consumption. As with most things, entering into the public food supply invokes safety standards and the resulting regulations and inspections.

When a local hospital reports an outbreak in severe vomiting, diarrhea and dehydration, to the County Health Department, an investigation is started. Tests are completed, The source located. More tests. Recalls launched. So, "the government" is involved at the local, state and perhaps federal levels and costs are borne by these agencies. But these costs are almost never recovered by "the government". 

A common "get-around" food laws is herd share or barter. But when a mother's child is near death in a hospital bed due to milk you provided, heaven help you. Good luck getting 12 jurors that believe the herd share disclaimer they signed gets you off the hook for liability. 
That's also when the public starts blaming "the government" with "Why did they allow this to go On, why didn't they stop this before people got sick?"


----------



## haypoint

Two die from cheese made from raw milk:

"Thu 9 Mar 2017
Source: CDC Listeria (Listeriosis) [edited] <https://www.cdc.gov/listeria/outbreaks/soft-cheese-03-17/index.html>


Highlights
----------
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], public health and regulatory officials in several states, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are investigating a multistate outbreak of _Listeria monocytogenes_ infections (listeriosis). Listeria can cause a serious, life-threatening illness. Six people infected with the outbreak strain of listeria have been reported from 4 states since 1 Sep 2016. All 6 people were hospitalized, and 2 people from Connecticut and Vermont died. One illness was reported in a newborn.

Epidemiologic and laboratory evidence indicates that soft raw milk cheese made by Vulto Creamery of Walton, New York is the likely source of this outbreak. Six of 6 people interviewed reported eating various types of soft cheeses in the month before their illness started.

The outbreak strain of listeria was identified in samples taken from 3 intact wheels of Ouleout cheese collected from Vulto Creamery. On 7 Mar 2017, Vulto Creamery recalled all lots of Ouleout, Miranda, Heinennellie, and Willowemoc soft wash-rind raw milk cheeses. The soft raw milk cheeses were distributed nationwide, with most being sold at retail locations in the northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, California, Chicago, Portland, Oregon, and Washington DC.

CDC recommends that consumers do not eat, restaurants do not serve, and retailers do not sell recalled soft raw milk cheeses made by Vulto Creamery. This investigation is ongoing. Updates will be provided when more information is available."

In another story:
Date: Fri 10 Mar 2017
Source: New York Times [edited]
< https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/nyregion/two-people-die-after-eating-raw-milk-cheese-made-in-new-york.html?_r=0>


Two people have died following an outbreak of listeriosis linked to a popular artisanal raw milk cheese made in upstate New York the authorities said this week.

The deaths occurred in Vermont and Connecticut, local officials said.
Four other people in New York and Florida reported feeling sick after eating Ouleout, the artisanal cheese, which is produced by Vulto Creamery in Walton, NY. Illnesses started on dates between 1 Sep of last year [2016] to 22 Jan 2017, the FDA said. All 6 people were hospitalized, and 2 people died.

Vulto Creamery, which produces Ouleout, said it was recalling the product, and, as a precautionary measure, 3 other soft wash-rind raw milk cheeses: Miranda, Heinennellie, and Willowemoc. "We are very busy working on this recall with FDA and our customers," the creamery said in an email, without offering details on the cause of the outbreak.

Vulto Creamery began contacting clients on 3 Mar [2017], asking them to return purchases of Ouleout after being informed of a listeria strain in a sample, the health department said. It issued a recall on
7 Mar 2017 and extended it to the 3 other brands.

The deaths highlighted concerns over safety regulations around artisanal cheese production in the United States, particularly around the raw milk cheese segment, which emerged only about a decade ago, experts say. The outbreak has also revived a continuing debate between the virtues of raw milk cheese, which aficionados say tastes better, and safety. Some customers swear only by pasteurized-milk cheese.

Europeans have eaten raw milk cheese for hundreds of years. In France, for example, 15 per cent of its cheese is made of unpasteurized milk, according to French agricultural statistics. The thinking is that when milk is cooked, or pasteurized, many of the flavor-rich enzymes are destroyed.

Ouleout, a soft washed-rind cheese that is aged for 60 days, "requires real craftsmanship" because it needs to retain a good amount of moisture even as it matures, said Carlos Yescas, program director at Oldways Cheese Coalition, a nonprofit organization that promotes artisanal cheese making. "Otherwise, the cheese will dry out really quickly." Washed-rind cheese is made by washing and curing the cheese in beer and other solutions, helping create its pungent flavor.

More than half of artisanal cheese produced in the US is made of unpasteurized milk, Mr Yescas said, adding that there are a number of ways in which the cheese could be contaminated. Listeria, he said, could originate from the wood boards used to age the cheese, the water supply or improper sanitation, like walking in dirty boots. "It's hard to pinpoint," Mr Yescas said.

In the US, regulations on raw milk cheese are less stringent than in Europe, where more steps are required to ensure that there is no contamination, he said. Here, there is only a single national standard for raw milk cheese production, Mr Yescas said, which requires that the cheese be aged for at least 60 days to block _Escherichia coli_ from developing. "We need to take a look again at the 60-day rule and have a consensus with the scientific community, regulators and cheese producers," Mr Yescas said.

Herd Share info: In 1987, the United States Food and Drug Administration prohibited distribution of unpasteurized dairy products in interstate commerce for sale to consumers (http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/11-1370_article).

However, sale of unpasteurized dairy products within the state where they are produced is regulated by each state, and some states permit sale of these products within these states. To circumvent these regulations for commercial sale of unpasteurized milk, some states allow milk producers to distribute unpasteurized milk through cow-leasing programs, whereby members purchase shares in dairy cows in exchange for a percentage of the milk produced (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5125a2.htm).

Exactly what the arrangement described as a "private membership club" that the unpasteurized milk producer in Pennsylvania had with its "members" who developed listeriosis, one in California and one in Florida, is not detailed in the news report above. The clinical isolates from the 2 cases had a genotype that was closely related to the strains isolated from raw chocolate milk produced by the same company. No recall related to this latest outbreak has been announced.

Another deadly outbreak last year:
http://www.isid.org

Date: Fri 18 Mar 2016
Source: CBS News [edited]
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/deadly-listeria-outbreak-linked-to-raw-milk/


Health officials say a deadly outbreak of listeriosis has been linked to raw milk from an organic farm in Pennsylvania. The illnesses happened in 2014, but it took investigators until now to determine the cause. Two patients got sick from the bacteria, one in California and one in Florida, and the patient in Florida died.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Friday [18 Mar 2016] that the outbreak had been traced to unpasteurized raw milk produced by Miller's Organic Farm in Bird-In-Hand, Pennsylvania.

In January [2016], the FDA found _Listeria_ in samples of raw chocolate milk produced by the same company and said genetic testing confirmed it was closely related to the strain that sent the 2 patients to the hospital in 2014.

Amos Miller, the owner of Miller's Organic Farm, said the company operates as a private membership club and only supplies milk and other farm-grown products to members. It does not distribute to retail stores or other outlets. Miller told CBS News the company is still selling raw milk and is not aware of any health problems. "I don't know that it was proved it's on the farm here," he said. "We hope and pray for the best."

Public health officials have long advised people not to drink raw milk or consume other unpasteurized dairy products because of the risk that it may contain dangerous pathogens like _Listeria_, _Salmonella_, _Escherichia coli_ and _Campylobacter_ bacteria. Pasteurized milk has been heated to high enough temperatures to kill the bacteria.

There have been a number of other widely publicized listeriosis outbreaks in recent years, including one last year traced to Blue Bell Creameries ice cream which killed 3 people and sickened 10. In 2014, 7 people died from listeriosis in caramel apples.

Young children, older adults, and people with weakened immune systems are at highest risk of severe illness from listeriosis. It's also a serious concern for pregnant women as the bacteria can lead to miscarriage, stillbirth, premature delivery or life-threatening infections in newborns.

The CDC says symptoms of listeriosis usually develop within a few days of eating contaminated food and may include fever, muscle aches, headache, stiff neck, confusion, loss of balance, and convulsions. Life-threatening complications can develop if the bacteria get into the bloodstream or central nervous system.

Although no recall related to this latest outbreak has been announced, the CDC warned consumers to be wary. "Because _Listeria_ was recently found in raw milk produced by Miller's Organic Farm, CDC is concerned that conditions may exist at the farm that may cause further contamination of raw milk and raw dairy products distributed by this company and make people sick," the CDC said in a statement.


----------



## chickenguy

haypoint said:


> New information about the dangers of raw milk. This is in a state that allows the sale of raw milk:
> Date: Mon 30 Apr 2012
> Source: Oregon Live [edited]
> <http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2012/04/oregon_health_officials_add_tw.html>
> 
> 
> Oregon health officials suspect 2 more illnesses are part of a raw milk outbreak traced nearly 3 weeks ago to a farm near Wilsonville.
> William Keene, senior epidemiologist with Oregon Public Health, said the 2 adults had both consumed raw milk from Foundation Farm, including one who continued to drink it after being warned about the outbreak.
> 
> Keene said one was sickened by _Campylobacter_, the other by _Cryptosporidium_, making 21 likely cases in the outbreak. Ten others were infected with _E. coli_ O157. One of the worst foodborne pathogens, _E. coli_ O157:H7 was on rectal swabs from 2 of the farm's
> 4 cows. Milk and manure from the farm also tested positive for the same bacteria.
> 
> State epidemiologists did not test the cows or the environment for these other organisms, so they don't know for sure that the new cases are linked to Foundation Farm milk, but Keene said it's likely. "There is a long list of pathogens that people can get from raw milk," he said.
> 
> Four children who drank the milk were hospitalized with acute kidney failure, which is associated with _E. coli_ O157:H7. As of Fri 27 Apr 2012, they were still in the hospital, Keene said.
> 
> Two of the patients, aged 14 and 13, are Portland area middle schoolers. The others are 3 and one years old. A 5th child from Lane County, who drank the milk while visiting relatives in the Portland area, was hospitalized and released.
> 
> Foundation Farm, located on 5 acres in the Stafford area, had a herd-share operation for a least a year selling parts of cows to 48 families. In return, they had regular access to the raw milk.
> 
> Health officials also interviewed most of the families. They were surprised that a person continued to drink the milk even after being advised that it was contaminated. Keene said the 2nd patient went looking for a new source.
> 
> Just under 3 percent of Oregonians drink raw milk, according to a survey by Oregon Public Health. They tend to be passionate about it, despite public warnings.
> 
> "We've documented yet another unfortunate incident where people missed the boat on one of the great advances in public health, pasteurization," Keene said.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can get more information at :
> http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/ho...aw-milk-much-more-likely-cause-illness-8.html


i grew up on raw milk we produced so have generations of people world wide avoid processed foods maintain your digestive tract and use common sense when it comes to basic hygiene. it kept me alive. hamburger. the south american veggies you eat, water, air and running with sharp sticks reading in the dark.....it all has inherent risks. sometimes the benfits outway the risk


----------



## haypoint

Humans contract Brucellosis from cheese made from raw milk that came from cows infected with Brucellosis. http://outbreakwatch.blogspot.com/2017/03/proahedr-brucellosis-mexico-za.html

http://www.dairyreporter.com/Regula...after-eating-unpasteurized-cheese-from-Mexico

http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/...g-infectious-disease-in-dallas-county-8712290


----------



## Vahomesteaders

The New England medical journal states that "The occurrence of human brucellosis is strictly related to animal disease and to the hygiene of the animal. It can be passed by both bodily fluids and the meat".

So again. Clean healthy animal equals no worry. They also state that it cant live beyond 60 days so mature raw cheese in brine wrap for that time and your clear. Also there are roughly 50 million cases of it and other food born illnesses in the US alone each year. Less than 2% are from raw milk.


----------



## arabian knight

Vahomesteaders said:


> .* Less than 2% are from raw milk.*


 And if Raw Milk were sold as much as some would want it to be that number would escalate way over 2%. And that 50 million in a years time? better get a non biased link to prove that one. LOL


----------



## Vahomesteaders

arabian knight said:


> And if Raw Milk were sold as much as some would want it to be that number would escalate way over 2%. And that 50 million in a years time? better get a non biased link to prove that one. LOL


Yeah that pesky bias cdc you like to quote isn't a good source I guess. Lol


----------



## haypoint

Vahomesteaders said:


> The New England medical journal states that "The occurrence of human brucellosis is strictly related to animal disease and to the hygiene of the animal. It can be passed by both bodily fluids and the meat".
> 
> So again. Clean healthy animal equals no worry. They also state that it cant live beyond 60 days so mature raw cheese in brine wrap for that time and your clear. Also there are roughly 50 million cases of it and other food born illnesses in the US alone each year. Less than 2% are from raw milk.


How often are dairy cows checked for Brucellosis? How does the dairy farmer determine that his herd has not become infected? Fresh bedding and sunshine is not brucellosis protection. Also, as stated in the article, "In the US, regulations on raw milk cheese are less stringent than in Europe, where more steps are required to ensure that there is no contamination, he said. Here, there is only a single national standard for raw milk cheese production, Mr Yescas said, which requires that the cheese be aged for at least 60 days to block _Escherichia coli_ from developing. "We need to take a look again at the 60-day rule and have a consensus with the scientific community, regulators and cheese producers," Mr Yescas said."

Comparing the safety of raw milk against all other food borne illnesses is misleading. Understanding that 2% of all food borne illnesses come from raw milk while recognizing raw milk in the nation's total food consumption is only .001% makes raw milk illnesses far more dangerous, based on consumption, than most other foods.

Many raw milk illnesses go unreported. This is because the symptoms often are not life threatening. The few that are reported must be verified. Often the original container has been consumed and disposed. While there are obvious connections, without fact based laboratory results, it is not listed as a raw milk caused outbreak. Only when the facts support the infection does it become a raw milk illness.

Cattle infected with brucellosis or tuberculosis look healthy. Campylobacter, salmonella, e coli, listeria, and other bacteria can come from healthy looking cattle. Clean feed, fresh bedding and sanitary care does not stop any of these.


----------



## arabian knight

Vahomesteaders said:


> Yeah that pesky bias cdc you like to quote isn't a good source I guess. Lol


 When you TRY and compare things. Do Not Lump stats~!. And then Leave Raw Milk ALL BY Itself like it didn't go with anything. Leave OFF Food Born Illnesses. Then Compare MILK Related to ONLY Raw Milk starts and see where the numbers are then Not 50 Million to 2%...... WHAT is 2%? how many, what is that Count. Just lump 50 million and to make raw milk LOOK sooooo low. Ya thats the ticket Slam everything together just to make a point. Fail.

Still if Raw Milk was sold as much as some would like it do be, the Numbers would Escalate HIGH. And that is because This Day In Age is not like the 1800's where people Grew up and had their immune system geared to accept drinking RM. This day in age with so MANY Generations away from doing that, you would have a Huge Rush to hospitals withy all sorts of Raw Milk Ailments.
Their Systems just can't it.... Period~!
And that is why it MUST be regulated.


----------



## DJ in WA

haypoint said:


> Humans contract Brucellosis from cheese made from raw milk that came from cows infected with Brucellosis. http://outbreakwatch.blogspot.com/2017/03/proahedr-brucellosis-mexico-za.html
> 
> http://www.dairyreporter.com/Regula...after-eating-unpasteurized-cheese-from-Mexico
> 
> http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/...g-infectious-disease-in-dallas-county-8712290



For those that didn't notice, this problem is with milk from Mexico. I would not get dairy products from there. I would also not get it from India, Thailand or Zimbabwe.

Here is the status of Brucellosis in the U.S. Note that every state is listed as free of the disease. The only risk of which I am aware is getting it from elk or bison, so near Yellowstone Park, they test more.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ou...information/ct_status_of_eradication_programs


----------



## DJ in WA

"Safe" dairy promoted by Haypoint, producing pasteurized milk. And some dairies producing raw milk look like this. You'd better cook that milk well!







My "unsafe" cows, which are supposed to make me afraid after doing this for 30+ years. A closed herd of disease-free, clean cows is not acceptable. Frying milk is the only way to prevent disease.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> For those that didn't notice, this problem is with milk from Mexico. I would not get dairy products from there. I would also not get it from India, Thailand or Zimbabwe.
> 
> Here is the status of Brucellosis in the U.S. Note that every state is listed as free of the disease. The only risk of which I am aware is getting it from elk or bison, so near Yellowstone Park, they test more.
> 
> https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ou...information/ct_status_of_eradication_programs


Michigan is considered "TB free" but there have been 50 farms confirmed with TB. The problem with the Yellowstone bison is that they are infecting range cattle.
The cheese, made from "Mexican" milk, is sold in the US.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> "Safe" dairy promoted by Haypoint, producing pasteurized milk. And some dairies producing raw milk look like this. You'd better cook that milk well!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My "unsafe" cows, which are supposed to make me afraid after doing this for 30+ years. A closed herd of disease-free, clean cows is not acceptable. Frying milk is the only way to prevent disease.


Do you have any idea what that photo shows? Those are dry cattle, not milk cattle. Thanks for the lovely photo of cattle in lush pasture. For those that missed it before, " Healthy looking cattle can carry diseases such as TB, brucellosis, campylobacter, listeria."


----------



## barnbilder

Yep, healthy looking cattle can carry brucellosis and TB, that is why there is a testing program. Chances are very low of getting TB or Brucellosis from a tested and accredited herd. Now maybe, if you source your milk from Mexico, due to the raw milk shortage created by the raw milk nazis, you might have a problem.
Listeriosis is just a chance you take, like crossing the street. Vegetables, meats, all kinds of things infect people with listeriosis quite frequently. If you weed out the cases caused by people dipping from a commercial bulk tank where they work and making soft cheese in a bath tub shared with a bunch of people, the stats on raw milk are not too bad. There have been several outbreaks involving pasteurized dairy products through the years as well, so contamination can be the culprit, rather than animal health. 

Animals shedding a lot of listeria are typically not what you would call healthy, the problem with milk safety is and always has been the pooling of milk, the larger the pool of animals, the more chance of contamination, thus the need for frying the milk. Anybody selling much in the way of artisanal cheese is probably jumping through the governmental hoops created to ensure their failure, and thereby sourcing their milk from a grade A dairy, and most grade A dairies have to sell a lot of milk to justify jumping through the hurdles required to be grade A, so they are probably pooling milk from a lot of animals, with which they have little time to evaluate an individual animal's health.


----------



## stanb999

Don't eat flour

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2017/04/139082/#.WOZekdLyu00

Soy products. 

http://newsradio1310.com/health-officials-illnesses-reported-in-nine-states-as-food-recall-expands/


Not the Guac.. 

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2017/...guacamole-recalled-for-listeria/#.WOZfUdLyu00


----------



## CircleC

Stay away from frozen pizza too. 

"WASHINGTON, March 15, 2017 – RBR Meat Company, Inc., a Vernon, Calif. establishment, is recalling approximately 21,220 pounds of frozen pizza product that may be adulterated with Listeria monocytogenes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today."


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> Yep, healthy looking cattle can carry brucellosis and TB, that is why there is a testing program. Chances are very low of getting TB or Brucellosis from a tested and accredited herd. Now maybe, if you source your milk from Mexico, due to the raw milk shortage created by the raw milk nazis, you might have a problem.
> Listeriosis is just a chance you take, like crossing the street. Vegetables, meats, all kinds of things infect people with listeriosis quite frequently. If you weed out the cases caused by people dipping from a commercial bulk tank where they work and making soft cheese in a bath tub shared with a bunch of people, the stats on raw milk are not too bad. There have been several outbreaks involving pasteurized dairy products through the years as well, so contamination can be the culprit, rather than animal health.
> 
> Animals shedding a lot of listeria are typically not what you would call healthy, the problem with milk safety is and always has been the pooling of milk, the larger the pool of animals, the more chance of contamination, thus the need for frying the milk. Anybody selling much in the way of artisanal cheese is probably jumping through the governmental hoops created to ensure their failure, and thereby sourcing their milk from a grade A dairy, and most grade A dairies have to sell a lot of milk to justify jumping through the hurdles required to be grade A, so they are probably pooling milk from a lot of animals, with which they have little time to evaluate an individual animal's health.



Most states are considered “Brucellosis-free” and there is no testing. Last year, some puppy mill bitches were infected with brucellosis at an Amish farm in Michigan. If it weren’t for the fact that the disease causes abortion and the dog was used for breeding, it would likely have gone unreported.

Most states do not test for TB. Federal meat inspectors might catch visible lesions on a carcass. Then, when possible, there would be testing done at the farm of origin. But that involves a bunch of RFID mumbo jumbo that isn’t really this topic.

In Michigan, one of three or four states known to have TB in cattle, the focus is on cattle in the four counties where deer spread TB. But, recently a closed dairy herd, hundreds of miles from the TB zone, found to be infected with TB. More recently, in another area, a herd of longhorn cattle were infected with TB. It happens and without warning.

Most cheese in this country is not from Grade A dairies, it comes from Grade B dairies. Most Amish dairies, unable to provide sanitation standards and refrigeration, are Grade B dairies.

Illnesses attributed to pasteurized milk are rare and generally attributed to contaminated containers or a failure to properly pasteurize. Most of the illnesses likely caused by contaminated raw milk go unreported. In those that are reported, most often the original milk container is gone and no positive connection can be made between the illness and the raw milk. Even if in a population of 100,000 and 20 drank raw milk and all 20 became ill, that is not considered to be caused by the raw milk, unless there is a milk container remaining for each person rendered ill. Seems to me, that with so few reported cases and so few that are able to be proven, the number of cases that are proven is astonishingly high, considering how few drink raw milk.

Interesting that you blame an apparent raw milk shortage on those that oppose raw milk sales, instead of blaming those that promote the mythical benefits of raw milk.

Protection from Artisanal cheeses is amazingly limited. It is generally considered that bacteria will expire before the 90 day holding time. But, there have been instances where bacteria remain beyond the curing times, if those times are to be believed.

We agree that pooling milk adds to the dangers. Please understand that the dairies with 1000 to 10,000 milking cows buy their cows from all over North America. They become a part of your community and no herd is exempt.

Listeria is in the soil. Likely in the soil on your farm. Will your cattle ever eat a piece of grass with dirt on it? Will your cattle ever find a moldy corn stalk, molds ear of corn? Then your beautiful cattle from a closed herd can pass listeria to your children through the beautiful, sparkling white raw milk. Let me know what hospital and I’ll send a card.

But just to be clear. I'm not opposed to you feeding your family raw milk from your cows. Whole different deal when you want to enter the public food chain or want to buy it from some guy you know.


----------



## barnbilder

I have had animals die from listeria. Have also successfully treated several. Have consumed raw milk from animals that were likely shedding listeria, although anything exhibiting symptoms would probably not be adding much to the pail (not that I would use milk from a symptomatic listeria case.) Consulted physicians on the matter. Their unanimous response was that there was absolutely no increased danger from consuming raw milk from a herd that has had a listeria case. Our entire family had already been exposed, because it is everywhere. Oddly enough, even with it in our soil and having been present in our animals, we have never seen it on a culture test in our milk. (You can send your milk to a state lab and test what your animals are shedding, in the milk. Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund recommends having a history of this practice if considering a herd share arrangement. If you want to see something really freaky, send in a sample with some store bough pasteurized milk). We have never sent a sample from a symptomatic animal, I'm sure they would shed like crazy, but oddly enough, most cases have been in drys, or in animals that had other problems preventing them from being in the milk string. And these were confirmed cases, vet diagnosis, necropsy, etc.

Listeria is a funny disease, it really needs a catalyst of some kind. It's already been in your mouth, if any animals on your farm have it, you've already been exposed. It would be silly to think that your animals aren't exposed even if you haven't had cases. Exposure to listeria does not guarantee infection, this is true for many diseases. When high concentrations of listeria are present, like might happen in a case of contamination in a sterile medium, the chances for infection go up. When the immune system is compromised the chance of infection goes up. Most livestock outbreaks come as a result of some weakening event, say stress or maybe a nutritional imbalance, combined with a weather shift, and often times when using a highly contaminated feed source. Corn silage can be loaded with listeria. All your cows won't come down with it, even if they are eating the same contaminated feed. 

Agreed, city kids that don't play with their tonka trucks in the silage pit are probably sitting ducks for some starry eyed cubicle farmer that now owns one goat and is peddling milk from the poor creature as it circles to it's death. But they are also sitting ducks for the majority of the industrial food complex, if they are able to be infected with listeria, they will get it from spinach or hot dog juice, and if not listeria, it's a slow death from trans-fat, sodium based preservatives and copious amounts of sugar.

I'm going to die, I'm pretty sure of that. I will take my chances doing it with raw milk, but if I start walking in circles, I'm eventually going by the medicine cabinet, and I know how to take care of it, so I don't think listeria is bad enough to get it done.


----------



## DoubleAcre

https://chriskresser.com/raw-milk-reality-is-raw-milk-dangerous/

Older article but I found it after my wife read a CDC article telling everyone how dangerous raw milk was. We buy raw cow milk from a local clean Farm and now milk our own goats and drink it raw. Everything remains clean and sanitary as it should. Considering raw milk illness vs benefits vs other commercial food problems, I'll stick to local healthy sources for my unprocessed foods.

That being said, not everyone has access to a good local dairy farm and I believe that commercial milk has to be pasteurized. A lot can happen to it by the time it reaches the market. I just choose to find local sources as I don't like the idea of what might be hiding in my food. I do get a kick though with words of marketing.

Drink low fat milk. It's healthier. - No its more profitable to sell the cream in a different manner. Low fat milk is also low on health benefits. 

It's only safe if it's pasteurized. - Not really, it just fixes what happens to it and helps it last long enough to sell at a store. Raw milk doesn't last long.

Now homogenized to ensure nice even cream distribution in every glass. - No they did that to hide the slude that settles to the bottom when it sites long enough. Americans won't buy it if it's not pretty. Look at the fake red beef they buy... Never mind the now tiny fat molecules scarring your arteries.

Those are my thoughts anyways. I feel good about eating local and staying away from naturally and artificially flavored science projects. 

Each to their own but remember, don't drive cars, there dangerous! Or maybe it's just that person that's not taking enough care to provide a safe ride that hurts someone.


----------



## DoubleAcre

Maybe we should title this as CDC strikes again?

http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/cdc-blasted-for-blaming-death-on-raw-milk/


----------



## barnbilder

I would have to disagree with the theory that pasteurization increases shelf life. Properly handled raw milk, chilled quickly in a sterile container with little airspace will easily last twice as long as any pasteurized milk transported from a store. And when it turns, it turns into something still nearly edible, pet grade at least. Pasteurized milk turns directly into sewage that your pet scavengers won't even eat.


----------



## DJ in WA

haypoint said:


> Illnesses attributed to pasteurized milk are rare and generally attributed to contaminated containers or a failure to properly pasteurize. Most of the illnesses likely caused by contaminated raw milk go unreported. In those that are reported, most often the original milk container is gone and no positive connection can be made between the illness and the raw milk. Even if in a population of 100,000 and 20 drank raw milk and all 20 became ill, that is not considered to be caused by the raw milk, unless there is a milk container remaining for each person rendered ill. Seems to me, that with so few reported cases and so few that are able to be proven, the number of cases that are proven is astonishingly high, considering how few drink raw milk.


We've been through this before, but you apparently didn't get it, or are deliberately trying to mislead.

As I was taught in my epidemiology courses, it is harder to identify illnesses caused by foods with a wider distribution, because it is harder to connect the dots. Since raw milk is usually more locally distributed than pasteurized milk, it is easier to spot cases of illness caused by it.

So we miss more illnesses by pasteurized milk than by raw milk, because of distribution.

Furthermore, since health care providers are trained that pasteurized milk cannot cause illness, they often don't consider it when a patient is ill.

The goal of the powers that be is to eventually have sterile food. Then they can produce it as cheaply as possible without concern for sanitation. Or you can feed animals feed that increases dangerous pathogens as does high grain diets in cattle (acidosis and E. Coli) And of course, we will become more immunologically naïve, and become more ill should we encounter certain pathogens. Raise your kids on sterile carpet, or concrete, and chlorinate, steam clean dishes, etc.

Years ago I was at a public health conference and talking to a leading food safety epidemiologist from the University of Minnesota. I asked him what he thought of irradiating food, and he was quite excited about it. At the time I also thought it was the answer to many issues, but eventually came to question the wisdom of a sterile world.

But hey, I'm sure it would make people more money, if we idiot consumers would get in line.

One thing I do know is that our health is the least concern by these industries. Just like education is not the purpose of public education, and freedom is not the purpose for our wars, etc.

It is all about money.


----------



## haypoint

DJ in WA said:


> We've been through this before, but you apparently didn't get it, or are deliberately trying to mislead.
> 
> As I was taught in my epidemiology courses, it is harder to identify illnesses caused by foods with a wider distribution, because it is harder to connect the dots. Since raw milk is usually more locally distributed than pasteurized milk, it is easier to spot cases of illness caused by it.
> 
> So we miss more illnesses by pasteurized milk than by raw milk, because of distribution.
> 
> Furthermore, since health care providers are trained that pasteurized milk cannot cause illness, they often don't consider it when a patient is ill.
> 
> The goal of the powers that be is to eventually have sterile food. Then they can produce it as cheaply as possible without concern for sanitation. Or you can feed animals feed that increases dangerous pathogens as does high grain diets in cattle (acidosis and E. Coli) And of course, we will become more immunologically naïve, and become more ill should we encounter certain pathogens. Raise your kids on sterile carpet, or concrete, and chlorinate, steam clean dishes, etc.
> 
> Years ago I was at a public health conference and talking to a leading food safety epidemiologist from the University of Minnesota. I asked him what he thought of irradiating food, and he was quite excited about it. At the time I also thought it was the answer to many issues, but eventually came to question the wisdom of a sterile world.
> 
> But hey, I'm sure it would make people more money, if we idiot consumers would get in line.
> 
> One thing I do know is that our health is the least concern by these industries. Just like education is not the purpose of public education, and freedom is not the purpose for our wars, etc.
> 
> It is all about money.


You are right, illnesses caused by raw milk is generally localized. It often doesn't get noticed until a dozen or so show up at the hospital. however a bad batch of "pasturized" milk would sicken hundreds or thousands and would not be able to overlook.

It isn't about freedom and it isn't about money. It is all about safe food.


----------



## haypoint

DoubleAcre said:


> Maybe we should title this as CDC strikes again?
> 
> http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/cdc-blasted-for-blaming-death-on-raw-milk/


 I don't know if anything in that article is true, but some of it is false, “Yet, there have been no cases of Listeriosis attributed to raw milk consumption going back 40 years, or more. Unlike raw milk, pasteurized dairy has been linked to several deaths in the past 10 years,” the foundations said." is nonsense.


----------



## haypoint

Date: Sat 29 Apr 2017
Source: Emerging Infectious Diseases Volume 23, Number 6--June 2017 [edited] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/6/15-1603_article

"Unpasteurized dairy products are responsible for almost all of the 761
illnesses and 22 hospitalizations in the USA that occur annually
because of dairy-related outbreaks caused by EHEC, _Salmonella spp._,
_L. monocytogenes_, and _Campylobacter spp._ More than 95 percent of
these illnesses are salmonellosis and campylobacteriosis. Consumers of
unpasteurized milk and cheese are a small proportion of the USA
population (3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively), but compared
with consumers of pasteurized dairy products, they are 838.8 times
more likely to experience an illness and 45.1 times more likely to be
hospitalized"


----------



## stanb999

haypoint said:


> Date: Sat 29 Apr 2017
> Source: Emerging Infectious Diseases Volume 23, Number 6--June 2017 [edited] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/6/15-1603_article
> 
> "Unpasteurized dairy products are responsible for almost all of the 761
> illnesses and 22 hospitalizations in the USA that occur annually
> because of dairy-related outbreaks caused by EHEC, _Salmonella spp._,
> _L. monocytogenes_, and _Campylobacter spp._ More than 95 percent of
> these illnesses are salmonellosis and campylobacteriosis. Consumers of
> unpasteurized milk and cheese are a small proportion of the USA
> population (3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively), but compared
> with consumers of pasteurized dairy products, they are 838.8 times
> more likely to experience an illness and 45.1 times more likely to be
> hospitalized"


silly statistics... 838 times what? 1 in 300 million? So 838 in 300 million. 45 x 1 in a 100 million... Oh the humanity. When numbers are vague evidence is thin.


----------



## haypoint

stanb999 said:


> silly statistics... 838 times what? 1 in 300 million? So 838 in 300 million. 45 x 1 in a 100 million... Oh the humanity. When numbers are vague evidence is thin.


If it is the complexity of the statistics that trouble you, simply stick to the 761 illnesses and 22 hospitalizations, annually. Yea, I know, your uncle Hank drank raw milk until he was 98, so you'll feed raw milk out of someone's bulk tank to your children, 'cause he proved it to be safe.

838 times greater number of getting sick from raw milk than drinking pasteurized milk. If one person in a million got sick from pasteurized milk, then you should expect 838 people got sick from raw milk. I just posted a short clip, if you want to understand it better, follow the link I posted.


----------



## barnbilder

I wouldn't drink anything that came close to a bulk tank. There is a good reason to pasteurize some things.


----------



## DoubleAcre

I agree with barnbilder and think sometimes it seems like the raw milk people are trying to say never pasturize and the other crowd is saying never drink raw milk.

To me this thought kinda ends the debate. The large commercial dairy industry HAS to pasturize. They can't provide raw milk safely. For those that don't have access to a good raw source, they should buy pasteurized. But you should not have the right to say it's illegal for anyone to consume or purchase raw milk. I know it's safe when handled correctly and it's my decision. I get it. Farm "abc" doesn't like to clean their equipment and are tainting what was a safe product. Don't buy from them. Don't look at the kitchen of your favorite restaurant because the kid working there doesn't care about cleanliness or what just fell into your food. People get sick buying ground beef from a trusted source. But it's not illegal. They recall it and fix it. Some good dairy farms have to shut down sometimes to fix an issue. That doesn't mean you outlaw them.

I guess I'm repeating myself but, people have gotten sick from a lot of different food sources. That's why we have to keep sources in check. But don't tell me I'm not allowed to buy raw milk. This could easily get carried away with debates on raw eggs, oysters,.... whatever. It's food. Eat what you like. Drink what you like. Enjoy the freedom of not having your diet micro managed by those who could very possibly only be scared you won't buy their product so they'll outlaw their competition because they're a growing threat. Maybe that conspiracy theory isn't true. I don't care. I just want my freedom and my raw milk!


----------



## Ronney

DA, that is a good post. 

Cheers,
Ronnie


----------



## barnbilder

If you take a serious, in depth look at the numbers the CDC push so heavily, you will find out that a lot of those numbers come from-
A. Low paid, often immigrant workers who get a chance to pinch some milk from the bulk tank at a commercial dairy them or someone they know work at. Then they make dairy products in questionable, often improvised receptacles, possibly in a very unsanitary environment.
B. Raw milk providers that are attempting to operate in a near commercial model.
The CDC and the dairy industry do not wish to provide actual numbers from raw milk providers that operate on a small scale, use good sanitation, chill milk properly, sell locally to customers that slowly acclimate themselves to raw milk, and regularly test their animals for disease and their milk for pathogens. Those numbers would be interesting.


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> I wouldn't drink anything that came close to a bulk tank. There is a good reason to pasteurize some things.


So, you are against the off farm sale of raw milk?


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> If you take a serious, in depth look at the numbers the CDC push so heavily, you will find out that a lot of those numbers come from-
> A. Low paid, often immigrant workers who get a chance to pinch some milk from the bulk tank at a commercial dairy them or someone they know work at. Then they make dairy products in questionable, often improvised receptacles, possibly in a very unsanitary environment.
> B. Raw milk providers that are attempting to operate in a near commercial model.
> The CDC and the dairy industry do not wish to provide actual numbers from raw milk providers that operate on a small scale, use good sanitation, chill milk properly, sell locally to customers that slowly acclimate themselves to raw milk, and regularly test their animals for disease and their milk for pathogens. Those numbers would be interesting.


How deep did you have to look at the CDC reports to discover those pesky low paid immigrants pinching milk and hauling it to the Farmers Market in an old barn boot (or other improvised receptacle)?. Support your claim.
Wouldn't a larger raw milk dairy have a greater risk to a greater number of people? Since illness and hospitalizations caused by consumption of contaminated raw milk are only investigated when local Community Health Officials report it and often times the un consumed raw milk is not available by the time CDC gets into it. So, cases where hundreds of consumers were impacted, there is a greater chance that someone will still have some milk in the fridge. So, larger operations end up being the focus. Conversely, if you or an Amish family get sick from drinking raw milk with more bacteria than your body can handle, that isn't going to show up on a CDC statistic. I doubt the overall risk is different, but a large operation has a greater chance of being found out. But it really isn't fair to compare a 3-4 cow dairy, hand milking into a plastic pail in a 100 year old wood barn to a modern, stainless steel system, unlimited hot water, cash flow that permits frequent tests of the cows and their milk.
But mostly, I'm just presenting the information and have no interest in people drinking the milk from their family cow. But those that attempt to taint the public perception of milk by promoting raw milk in spite of CDC data, hurt thousands of real farmers and their families.


----------



## barnbilder

You are spouting nonsense. Proper handling doesn't involve carrying boots or plastic buckets. All the stainless steel amenities in the world cannot overcome a dead rat in the bulk tank. Only pasteurization can. The cdc numbers are made up of primarily two scenarios. Big operations in states with liberal raw milk laws and large, potentially ignorant consumer bases. It's almost like they keep those around just for the statistics. The other scenario is black market milk made into soft cheese in the bathtub of low income housing. These statistics are easily found, I have linked them before, time and time again, in response to your incoherent ramblings and CDC copy/pastings.


----------



## Vahomesteaders

Father dies from botulism from nacho cheese. 1 of 5 in that area to do so. 

http://abc7.com/health/father-dies-...-food/2023581/?cmp_id=sf80814002&sf80814002=1


----------



## chaossmurf

well my thoughts on the entire mik issue is this
1-- I don't remember very well but --I don't distinctly remember my mom pasturizing her breastmilk ---so I think raw milk is fine --because its worked well for BILLIONS of years maybe only a few 100 million but still safe 
2--- would you feed your kids breastmilk that's been harvested from a few 100 moms & stored all together in one "bulk" tank ???
3--- pretty much means if its going to be stored together =means it needs to be made safer
4--- because im stricktly spitblling a guess on the % of milk drank but id guess a good 75% is going to kids --if not way way way higher %


----------



## DoubleAcre

Vahomesteaders said:


> Father dies from botulism from nacho cheese. 1 of 5 in that area to do so.
> 
> http://abc7.com/health/father-dies-...-food/2023581/?cmp_id=sf80814002&sf80814002=1


Not sure what that has to do with raw milk.


----------



## haypoint

DoubleAcre said:


> Not sure what that has to do with raw milk.


You are correct. While tons of cheese have recently been recalled due to dangerous levels of bacteria from improperly pasteurized or unpasteurized milk, this news report did not connect these deaths with raw milk.


----------



## Vahomesteaders

Simply shows that health risks and deaths come from all angels and industries in the food market.


----------



## chaossmurf

angels ? or angles ??


----------



## Vahomesteaders

Auto correct does not always work. Lol


----------



## DoubleAcre

Vahomesteaders said:


> Simply shows that health risks and deaths come from all angels and industries in the food market.


Ahh but when beef makes someone sick, we blame the processing plant. When chicken makes someone sick, we blame the processing. When spinach gets recalled, it's due to processing. But when raw milk makes someone sick, we don't just blame the milk itself. No! We have to make sure no one is allowed to drink it. I know, I know. Millions of people drink it and never have a problem. But lets not look at that because someone DID get sick. That proves without a doubt that it's the milk and not the processing.

All I need is a few more thoughts with that kind of logic and I'll be among the "best" political minds ever to make laws for everyone's "safety". Just like the lady my wife met at the grocery store. When she found out that we make our own yogurt she said that sounded dangerous because you're working with a live culture and it should be outlawed! People are funny, but unfortunately those funny people also vote. Yikes!!!


----------



## haypoint

DoubleAcre said:


> Ahh but when beef makes someone sick, we blame the processing plant. When chicken makes someone sick, we blame the processing. When spinach gets recalled, it's due to processing. But when raw milk makes someone sick, we don't just blame the milk itself. No! We have to make sure no one is allowed to drink it. I know, I know. Millions of people drink it and never have a problem. But lets not look at that because someone DID get sick. That proves without a doubt that it's the milk and not the processing.
> 
> All I need is a few more thoughts with that kind of logic and I'll be among the "best" political minds ever to make laws for everyone's "safety". Just like the lady my wife met at the grocery store. When she found out that we make our own yogurt she said that sounded dangerous because you're working with a live culture and it should be outlawed! People are funny, but unfortunately those funny people also vote. Yikes!!!


It would be rare for beef to have dangerous virus or bacteria in the meat. Most meat is eaten cooked. The bacteria in meat comes from processing contamination. Chickens don't have e coli in their meat, it gets there through processing and only a fool would eat raw chicken. The spinach recall was from raw animal waste spread in the spinach patch. 
If you believe raw milk is safe, milk your cow and drink it. No one says you can't. Nearly all foods have standards that must be met when placing food into the public food system. In most states, one of the requirements for milk is pasteurization.

Ever wonder why hamburger gets recalled but never steaks and roasts?


----------



## barnbilder

What if I don't have a cow, and I specifically want raw milk for culinary experiences that require raw milk? They sell meat raw, and there is steak tartar, jerky is dried, usually doesn't hit temperatures that would kill anything, not if it is good jerky anyway. You can't make a decent casu marzu with pasteurized milk.

The big issue with raw milk is that there are some people that like milk, and milk products, but cows milk makes them sick, and goats milk doesn't. In the few places that you can buy goat's milk in a store, your only option is pretty much one brand of canned goat's milk. It happens to taste like old shoes. The dairy industry is catching on with crossing a2 genetics into the holsteins, but it is still probably going to be a while before a2 milk is available on a wide scale. Probably the vast majority of people that buy raw milk, buy it because they are lactose intolerant, but like milk and things cooked with milk and milk products. They seek out people with goats or breeds of cows with a2 milk. Not everyone is zoned to keep livestock at home.

The people they are buying from don't pasteurize it, because they are too small scale, not grade a inspected anyway, don't sell enough to justify that expense. If they did, they would raise holsteins and sell it to someone that sent out a tanker truck instead of dealing with a bunch of freaky raw milk weirdos.

This is not to say, after diligent research, some of these consumers don't pasteurize the milk they buy, or use it to cook with, or any number of things that would never be a problem, just like raw hamburger from the grocery store, which most certainly can kill you if you don't cook it, yet with proper handling is almost perfectly safe.

You would think, with the thousands of consumers purchasing raw milk, the powers that be would tailor food safety programs geared toward providing guidelines for these consumers, like they do with raw meat. Instead they treat raw milk like alcohol during the prohibition era, with much the same results.


----------



## DoubleAcre

haypoint said:


> ...The bacteria in meat comes from processing contamination. Chickens don't have e coli in their meat, it gets there through processing... The spinach recall was from raw animal waste spread in the spinach patch. (Processing)


My point was pretty much what you said. How the food is processed is what determines if it will be safe or not. Same with milk.

I'm fortunate enough to be able to milk my own animals and I live in a state that allows raw milk sales. But not everyone can. What bugs me is the unfair treatment milk gets in other states. They force labels to warn people about eating undercooked food - great! Raw milk here also needs to be labeled stating it's unpasteurized and exempt from inspection. Nothing wrong with that. The consumer is being educated and gets to make the choice. Why should states like VA or NC tell their citizens that in the land of the free, they are not allowed the choice to purchase raw milk. Why are they blaming the product and not the processing? Care to get into the debate about product safety versus subsidiary control? 

Before someone says it is the product at fault, I'm going to disagree. Far too many people enjoy properly processed raw milk with no issues. If it was the product, that couldn't happen. Isn't that exactly how "they" would test their theory? Give product "A" to a large group of people and see what happens. Now let's have a cow step in the pail, don't say anything, and give that to group B. Huh, they got sick. Let's put a ban on raw milk?

I guess we over simplify things here. Instead of contemplating laws and bans and taking away people's freedom, if a goat steps in the pail, the pail gets dumped, everything gets re-sanitized, and we start over.

Keep It Simple, Keep It Clean, Enjoy Life! Don't make stupid laws that take away a simple freedom of food choice.



haypoint said:


> If you believe raw milk is safe, milk your cow and drink it. No one says you can't.


But that's just it. I'm allowed to choose because I own the animal. In a lot of states I'm not allowed to choose if I don't own the animal. It's kinda like selling your own pork. I can butcher my own pig and give it away. That's safe. But I can't sell it unless it's butchered under USDA inspection or it's not safe. The only difference on safety is wether or not money is involved. If they were really concerned about safety I wouldn't be allowed to give it away. If it was all about safety and people's health, cigarettes would be illegal not profitably taxed.

If every part of the US would allow people the freedom to choose what kind of milk they wanted to drink, I'd shut up : ) Until then I'll probably keep debating it in the forums where it's probably not gonna make a difference.


----------



## GTX63

Not the entire problem but a portion of it. The United States population has greatly increased, and with it are a lot of folks who do not function well outside of their own insulated space. Increased regulations go hand in hand. Some would say regulations create a nanny type atmosphere; others might counter that the need to take care of people who can't/won't take care of themselves create the regulations. Like the chicken and the egg argument, is the government protecting you from genuine risks or from yourself?


----------



## DoubleAcre

GTX63 said:


> ...a lot of folks who do not function well outside of their own insulated space. ...others might counter that the need to take care of people who can't/won't take care of themselves create the regulations.


But those people are allowed to purchase raw meat that requires a degree of competence to prepare. It's labeled to fully cook it but if they choose to eat it raw or under cooked, that's on them. Put the same label on raw milk. "Should be pasteurized before use". If they choose to drink it raw,... I don't care what kind of warnings they want to put on raw milk. Just treat it the same as every other potentially "dangerous" food and let everyone the freedom to obtain it. 

Some people are buying in states that allow it to be sold labeled for animal consumption only and drinking it themselves. We should not have to be that "sneaky" to obtain milk. It's milk for goodness sakes.



GTX63 said:


> ...is the government protecting you from genuine risks or from yourself?


Or neither?

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+the+government+hiding+about+raw+milk

Normally I get turned off about conspiracy theories but come on. With all the dangers the government allows, milk? Really?

Look at all the dangerous drugs and chemicals our government allows us to eat that are banned in other countries due to health risks. But the government is going to protect us from our own 100% natural milk? When I stop rofl I'm gonna sober up and start to think maybe money and power might have something to do with this crazy idea. People are dying from peanuts. Why are we content with just being careful when we should adapt "safer laws" and ban them. I guess that would not be very profitable especially when applied to the other thousands of potentially dangerous items that simply have warning labels. Warning labels protect us and our freedom. Banning milk does not. So what does it protect?


----------



## haypoint

"My point was pretty much what you said. How the food is processed is what determines if it will be safe or not. Same with milk." Nope. The disease bacteria that can kill you is in the milk, from the cow, prior to processing. Failed processing can create or exacerbate the bacteria or disease. You don't get Campylobacter from bad processing, it's in the milk.


----------



## barnbilder

40% of raw chicken is contaminated with campylobacter. You can also get it from unchlorinated water. 4,700 people found that out in New Zealand. Only a few of them died, though, because campylobacter is really not that bad, as far as diseases go.


----------



## DoubleAcre

http://slowfood.com/slowcheese/eng/18/risks-of-raw

"Campylobacter jejuni is the second-most common bacteria responsible for food poisoning. In raw milk, Campylobacter jejuni is found mostly during the first hours after milking, after which the milk's antibodies trigger a defense mechanism that kills it. Therefore the risks decrease as the hours pass, as long as the milk is kept refrigerated and exposed to the air, and they increase with poor hygiene and contact with contaminated water. The symptoms for someone who eats a food with a high concentration of Campylobacter jejuni are dysentery and other gastrointestinal problems. They usually last a few days and go away on their own. Again looking at the United States, the CDC has calculated an average of 845,024 cases per year (from 1999 to 2010) of people affected by dysentery after eating a food contaminated with Campylobacter. Only 34 of these had drunk contaminated raw milk."

So the good bacteria in raw milk fights off the bad. And you are more likely to be effected by legal sources of food, not illegal raw milk. Sounds like they banned the right source?

Campylobactor can be found in pasteurized milk too.









Sounds like milk can be "dangerous" no matter how you serve it. Not worth banning it!

I'm not saying every ounce of raw milk is safe and you can not say every once of pasteurized milk is safe. Let's keep everyone's freedom to choose which one they want.


----------



## DoubleAcre

Channel 9 News seems to have looked at both sides of the fence...

http://www.9news.com/mb/news/local/verify/verify-is-raw-milk-dangerous/449696097


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> 40% of raw chicken is contaminated with campylobacter. You can also get it from unchlorinated water. 4,700 people found that out in New Zealand. Only a few of them died, though, because campylobacter is really not that bad, as far as diseases go.


Very rare for people to eat raw chicken. There is a reason people cook chicken and milk.
Campylobacter not that bad, unless it is you or your family that suffer vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration and then organ shutdown. 
How does 4,700 people sickened by the same bacteria that infects milk, but in filthy birds, make raw milk more attractive?


----------



## barnbilder

You assume that people are actually smart enough to cook chicken thoroughly to the proper temperature before eating it? Or effectively clean their counters after processing chicken, before preparing their next meal or batch of recreational chemicals? You have worked in corrections and still assume this?


----------



## DoubleAcre

Or as the article mentioned, someone gets sick and they look into how until they hear raw milk and simply throw their hands up in the air saying "well there's your problem!" Case closed.

I think I quoted that fairly accurate...


----------



## farmerjan

I didn't want to get into the raw milk thing since I live in a state that bans it. However there are alot of cow share and herd share deals that are being quietly done here.

Couple of things....There is NO GRADE B Milk anymore. It was done away with years ago. Any Amish or Mennonites that sell milk to a milk processing company MUST be Grade A and must have proper cooling in a bulk tank. They do have either electricity that is run to their barns/milk houses only....OR they have generators that run the milking and cooling systems. I have tested several here in Va that did not have electricity in their houses but did have it in the barn for the bulk tank and milking/pipeline system. They are REQUIRED BY FEDERAL MILK RULES to meet certain requirements. So don't start on them as being "less than sanitary" in their procedures. They can milk either directly into a pipeline system that runs through the stanchion or tie stall barn, or in the milking parlor. Or they can milk into standard stainless milk buckets but now must carry that bucket into the milk house to pour the milk into the strainer where it goes into the milk tank. There are no more "dumping stations" allowed in the barn where they could carry the pail there instead of all the way into the milk house. Stainless steel or glass pipelines are required. 

I am not saying every amish or mennonite farm is the model of cleanliness. They aren't, but neither are alot of dairies that are run by farmers of all other denominations. 

Most raw milk if properly handled WILL keep in the fridge longer than pasteurized milk. It has to do with the Somatic Cell Count more than any processing. Farmers get paid a premium to produce the lowest scc that they can. The lower the cell count the longer the milk will keep. That is why there are standards, and premiums for lower scc and penalties if the scc gets above a certain level. Processing for anything other than fluid milk markets will take care of high cell count milk. It goes into things like powdered milk where the temps are high when being processed. Some will go into milk replacer for calves and some has even been dumped of there isn't a plant that can handle it immediately. The processing plants cannot put high cell count milk out there as it won't last on the shelf. And you cannot eradicate somatic cell count from anything, it is always there, a part of the animal product. How much has to do with cleanliness, but it also has to do with the animal and her body makeup. We all have some staph and strep bacteria. So do cows or goats or anything. How much and whether it is a problem is a whole other ball of wax.

I agree that not only should we "regulate" raw milk as we do raw meat or vegetables, and allow people to make their own informed choices, but testing farms that sell raw milk for some basic things like scc and other things that commercial dairies have to meet would take away alot of this BS. This will not happen while the powers that be, in many states, can control the milk supply and therefore control the dairy farmers. The milk companies that buy the raw milk out of the bulk tank do not want to give the farmers any alternatives that would loosen their control of the milk supply and therefore their profit line. 

There are commercial dairies that I would NEVER drink the milk out of their tank. And a couple that I would get milk from every day of the week. And not all are small dairies. 

Pasteurization and things like irradiation will not solve all ills. In fact, I read an article that rats were fed a diet of all irradiated feed and they eventually all died in 2 different studies. When extensive studies were done (autopsies also) it was discovered that the irradiated feed had not only killed all harmful pathogens, but it had also destroyed the beneficial things like vitamins and minerals and the animals had actually starved to death because their bodies were deprived of the nutrients to live. Your body requires live food from which the beneficial bacteria in your gut tract can break down into food that can be transported throughout your cells. 

Yes, I drink raw milk, both from my own cows and from other sources.  I have worked in different aspects of the dairy industry for over 40 years. I've seen more than I care to ever recount on different practices on different farms in different states.


----------



## farmerjan

I want to qualify my statement that there is no longer any grade B milk. Here in Va there is no grade B milk. There are no commercial dairies that are producing Grade B milk. The companies that buy milk from farms do not accept and will not pick up milk from dairies if they are not grade A. I should not have made that a blanket statement as I am not fully aware of all the rules in some of the states that do produce milk that mostly goes into cheese making. There used to be a couple of grade B dairies here in the early 80's but they were told that they had to convert and upgrade to grade A compliant facilities. Several did but a couple did not and just went out of the dairy business. All my dealings in the past 35 + years have been with grade A farms.


----------



## Vahomesteaders

farmerjan said:


> I want to qualify my statement that there is no longer any grade B milk. Here in Va there is no grade B milk. There are no commercial dairies that are producing Grade B milk. The companies that buy milk from farms do not accept and will not pick up milk from dairies if they are not grade A. I should not have made that a blanket statement as I am not fully aware of all the rules in some of the states that do produce milk that mostly goes into cheese making. There used to be a couple of grade B dairies here in the early 80's but they were told that they had to convert and upgrade to grade A compliant facilities. Several did but a couple did not and just went out of the dairy business. All my dealings in the past 35 + years have been with grade A farms.


I can tell you first hand that in harrisonburg/dayton area of va many Mennonite dairies are pumping out what could easily qualify for grade B or less and they are picking it up daily. Filthy filthy conditions. They will slap that cup right over a manure covered udder in a second. Our amish neighbors however hand clean and milk dozens of cows a day and have no issues. So I'll take the raw over what the big dairies are buying any day.


----------



## farmerjan

Regardless of what you "see" and I am just south of the harrisonburg/dayton area...the milk is meeting the requirements for grade A or they will not be able to ship it. Every single tank of milk has a sample taken before it is pumped onto the tanker. That sample is tested at the plant that the tanker goes to, BEFORE that milk is pumped off the tanker into the silos that store the milk until it is processed. It has to pass a minimum scc test AND a PI test, as well as the antibiotic tests, for contamination before it comes off the tanker. And when there were a few that tried to slide by, and started pumping off before the milk sample was run....and there was an issue, the WHOLE SILO OF MILK was contaminated. There was a BIG ISSUE of that happening and there was HE// to pay. So, as much as they want to "hurry up", they don't or else.
I am not saying that these dairies are all as clean as they should be, and that as I stated before, there are few I would actually drink milk out of the bulk tank. But, they are meeting the minimum requirements. I have had a farm with major scc issues and has had to dump their tank of milk and been put on probation due to problems, so I know what I am talking about. All I was trying to get across is that there are no grade B dairies in Va and that they have to meet minimum standards to be able to ship milk and stay in business in Va. That does require the cooling and storage of the milk on the farm in refridgerated bulk tanks.


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> You assume that people are actually smart enough to cook chicken thoroughly to the proper temperature before eating it? Or effectively clean their counters after processing chicken, before preparing their next meal or batch of recreational chemicals? You have worked in corrections and still assume this?


The prisons that I worked in had professional Food Service Staff supervise the convict's preparation of food. Any facility feeding 4,000 meals every day must insure sanitation standards are met.


----------



## haypoint

DoubleAcre said:


> Or as the article mentioned, someone gets sick and they look into how until they hear raw milk and simply throw their hands up in the air saying "well there's your problem!" Case closed.
> 
> I think I quoted that fairly accurate...


While the article quoted the raw milk, anti-vaccinate advocate as saying that raw milk is often wrongly blamed for sicknesses, the article also described the process the CDC or local health departments go through to dna match the bacteria in the patient and the bacteria in the milk. When both samples are unobtainable, raw milk doesn't get blamed, further depressing raw milk illness case numbers.


----------



## DoubleAcre

Correct. I should have been a little more clear to mention both sides. My mind was on the few instances of the finger pointing.


----------



## haypoint

farmerjan said:


> Regardless of what you "see" and I am just south of the harrisonburg/dayton area...the milk is meeting the requirements for grade A or they will not be able to ship it. Every single tank of milk has a sample taken before it is pumped onto the tanker. That sample is tested at the plant that the tanker goes to, BEFORE that milk is pumped off the tanker into the silos that store the milk until it is processed. It has to pass a minimum scc test AND a PI test, as well as the antibiotic tests, for contamination before it comes off the tanker. And when there were a few that tried to slide by, and started pumping off before the milk sample was run....and there was an issue, the WHOLE SILO OF MILK was contaminated. There was a BIG ISSUE of that happening and there was HE// to pay. So, as much as they want to "hurry up", they don't or else.
> I am not saying that these dairies are all as clean as they should be, and that as I stated before, there are few I would actually drink milk out of the bulk tank. But, they are meeting the minimum requirements. I have had a farm with major scc issues and has had to dump their tank of milk and been put on probation due to problems, so I know what I am talking about. All I was trying to get across is that there are no grade B dairies in Va and that they have to meet minimum standards to be able to ship milk and stay in business in Va. That does require the cooling and storage of the milk on the farm in refridgerated bulk tanks.


Farmer Jan, I only know the requirements for commercial milk in Michigan. For the past 70 years, even grade B milk had to be stored in refrigerated containers. Many Amish can meet the standards of grade B milk. It is often pasteurized and used in making cheeses.
In states that turn a blind eye to the "herd share" get around, even grade B standards don't have to be met. Your cow, your milk, your problem.
Thanks for the explanation on scc testing, antibiotics testing and the huge responsibility that dairy farmers face, preventing anyone from risking their farm over dirty milk.


----------



## haypoint

Vahomesteaders said:


> I can tell you first hand that in harrisonburg/dayton area of va many Mennonite dairies are pumping out what could easily qualify for grade B or less and they are picking it up daily. Filthy filthy conditions. They will slap that cup right over a manure covered udder in a second. Our amish neighbors however hand clean and milk dozens of cows a day and have no issues. So I'll take the raw over what the big dairies are buying any day.


Careful with that broad brush you are waving around. Many Mennonite dairies are filthy and all Amish dairies are **** and span? I have little information on the standards and conditions in "many Mennonite dairies". I suspect you don't either. In Michigan most Mennonite and Amish dairies wouldn't be able to market grade A milk. The standards and investment is too high.
It sounds like your neighbors have gained your trust. I would suspect that most of the time, their eColi count would be low. But when healthy looking cows, from clean dairies, give you milk, right out of the cow, with campylobacter, how often do your Amish neighbors send in a sample to be tested for the bacteria and diseases found in raw milk? Electrically challenged, many Amish struggle with adequate refrigeration.
When hand milking and a piece of dried manure gets flipped into a nearly full pail of fresh milk, some will dump out the whole bucket and some will quickly fish it out with their hand and some will let the milk filter collect it. I've never been able to see into a person's soul to be able to positively determine how they would react to this ethical dilemma. I suspect you cannot either.


----------



## barnbilder

haypoint said:


> The prisons that I worked in had professional Food Service Staff supervise the convict's preparation of food. Any facility feeding 4,000 meals every day must insure sanitation standards are met.


I think you misunderstood, which is not surprising.


----------



## Vahomesteaders

haypoint said:


> Careful with that broad brush you are waving around. Many Mennonite dairies are filthy and all Amish dairies are **** and span? I have little information on the standards and conditions in "many Mennonite dairies". I suspect you don't either. In Michigan most Mennonite and Amish dairies wouldn't be able to market grade A milk. The standards and investment is too high.
> It sounds like your neighbors have gained your trust. I would suspect that most of the time, their eColi count would be low. But when healthy looking cows, from clean dairies, give you milk, right out of the cow, with campylobacter, how often do your Amish neighbors send in a sample to be tested for the bacteria and diseases found in raw milk? Electrically challenged, many Amish struggle with adequate refrigeration.
> When hand milking and a piece of dried manure gets flipped into a nearly full pail of fresh milk, some will dump out the whole bucket and some will quickly fish it out with their hand and some will let the milk filter collect it. I've never been able to see into a person's soul to be able to positively determine how they would react to this ethical dilemma. I suspect you cannot either.


I am a cattle farmer. Of both meat and dairy cattle. I have a close working relationship with many of these Mennonite farms. I visit often. Including today. We have two of them who we visit multiple times a week. I care greatly for them but also would never use their milk. As to our neighbors they do run multiple comercial refrigerators. They have been selling dairy and cheese for over 25 years. They do test their milk often. The family is not against learning and have taken veterinary classes and many other classes to be able to emediatly spot problems. They have never had a sickness with any of their thousands of customers. Their milking areas are clean, the tails tied back with screens and filters used. That makes all the difference in the world. Many of the local dairies don't have room so the animals are kept on small dirt lots and brought in and fed and milked in the same area. It's cleaned at the end of the day AFTER both milking are done. Most of the cattle look awful and really it's inhumane how most are kept. Many times 40 to 50 cattle in a 1 or 2 acre tract. And this happens out in the open. You can see their farms lining the roads of Rockingham county but everyone turns a blind eye. Now this isn't all of them. There are some beautiful farms with good graze and ample room. But because of lack of land and wanting to stay in agriculture, these filthy smaller lot dairies are all over. So what I'm saying is, I see both operations and I trust the raw over the processed.


----------



## barnbilder

Vahomesteaders said:


> I am a cattle farmer. Of both meat and dairy cattle. I have a close working relationship with many of these Mennonite farms. I visit often. Including today. We have two of them who we visit multiple times a week. I care greatly for them but also would never use their milk. As to our neighbors they do run multiple comercial refrigerators. They have been selling dairy and cheese for over 25 years. They do test their milk often. The family is not against learning and have taken veterinary classes and many other classes to be able to emediatly spot problems. They have never had a sickness with any of their thousands of customers. Their milking areas are clean, the tails tied back with screens and filters used. That makes all the difference in the world. Many of the local dairies don't have room so the animals are kept on small dirt lots and brought in and fed and milked in the same area. It's cleaned at the end of the day AFTER both milking are done. Most of the cattle look awful and really it's inhumane how most are kept. Many times 40 to 50 cattle in a 1 or 2 acre tract. And this happens out in the open. You can see their farms lining the roads of Rockingham county but everyone turns a blind eye. Now this isn't all of them. There are some beautiful farms with good graze and ample room. But because of lack of land and wanting to stay in agriculture, these filthy smaller lot dairies are all over. So what I'm saying is, I see both operations and I trust the raw over the processed.


I see the same thing, this year with all the rain they are standing in mud up to their bellies. Close the windows when you ride by. Yum Yum. They better darned well cook anything that comes from those operations until it is well done.


----------



## haypoint

Date: Fri 15 Sep 2017
Source: CDC [edited]
< https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2017/p0915-raw-milk-brucella.html>


CDC and Texas Health Officials Warn About Illness Linked to Raw Milk from Texas Dairy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People who consumed raw milk or raw milk products from a Texas dairy should contact their health care provider immediately, warn health investigators from the CDC and the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS). Raw milk from the K-Bar Dairy in Paradise, Texas (northwest of Fort Worth), tested positive for a rare but potentially serious bacterium known as _Brucella [abortus_] RB51.

CDC advises that people who consumed raw milk or milk products from the K-Bar Dairy between 1 June 2017 and 7 August 2017, should get antimicrobial treatment to avoid the risk of lifelong, chronic infections. Initially, people with brucellosis experience fever, sweats, aches and fatigue. If not treated, _Brucella [abortus_] RB51 infection can result in long-term complications, like arthritis; heart problems; enlargement of the spleen or liver; and, in rare cases, nervous system problems, such as meningitis. RB51 can [also] cause severe illness in people with weakened immune systems and miscarriages in pregnant women.

"It's very important for people who drank raw milk from this dairy to seek treatment to prevent infection with _Brucella [abortus_] RB51,"
said William Bower, M.D., team lead for the CDC group that investigates brucellosis. "Even if people don't have any symptoms now, they can develop a chronic infection that can impact their health for years to come."

Milk from K-Bar dairy is known to have caused _Brucella_ infection in one Texas resident. An illness in a Texas woman has been linked to the dairy. Purchase records and illness reports indicate additional people in Texas and some as far away as California and North Dakota may need antimicrobials to prevent or treat infection. In Texas, raw milk is only allowed to be sold on site at the dairy. According to Texas DHSH, K-Bar dairy has been operating in compliance with state dairy laws and rules and is cooperating fully with the investigation.

CDC and Texas health officials have been trying to reach people in more than 800 households known to have purchased K-Bar raw milk. Texas is following up with 170; CDC tried to contact the remaining 672 households but many did not provide contact information. Of the 485 households with contact information, CDC successfully reached 236 households. Among the 236 households, 83 percent of people were exposed to RB51 by drinking the milk. Due to incomplete contact information, CDC staff have been unable to reach about 200 households in which someone bought K-Bar milk. People who sampled the milk at the dairy or got the milk from friends or family also may not be aware of their risk. So far, CDC and Texas health officials have received reports about people who drank K-Bar milk or have symptoms consistent with brucellosis caused by RB51 in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Ohio, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas.

CDC recommends that anyone who drank raw milk or consumed milk products from K-Bar dairy between 1 June 2017 and 7 August 2017, see their doctor for antimicrobial treatment to prevent infection. Because brucellosis can cause complications during pregnancy, including miscarriage, it is especially important for pregnant women who may have been exposed to seek medical care. RB51 is resistant to some antimicrobials that would normally be used to prevent or treat brucellosis, so people who drank the milk should tell their doctor that they may have been exposed to RB51 and refer their healthcare provider to the CDC website (link below).

People who have consumed the milk should also check themselves for fever for 4 weeks after they last drank the milk and watch for other brucellosis symptoms for 6 months. These symptoms include but are not limited to: muscle pain, lasting fatigue, arthritis, depression, and swelling of the testicles.

Doctors can find more information about testing patients for RB51 and which antibiotics to use to prevent infection on the CDC website at:
< https://www.cdc.gov/brucellosis/clinicians/rb51-raw-milk.html>.

About RB51
----------
RB51 is a weakened strain of _B. abortus_ used to vaccinate young female cattle against infection with more serious strains of _Brucella_. Vaccinating cows with the RB51 vaccine helps prevent abortions in cows and reduces the risk of people coming into contact with cows infected with more severe strains. However, in rare cases, vaccinated cows can shed RB51 in their milk.

Testing of milk from the individual cows in the dairy herd revealed 2 cows that were infected with _B. abortus_ RB51, supporting the conclusion that these cows are a source of RB51 contamination of the dairy's raw milk. Testing is ongoing by Texas officials to assure that the remaining cows in the herd do not pose an ongoing risk of RB51 contamination of the dairy's raw milk. The only way to avoid this potential exposure is to drink milk that has been pasteurized to kill the germs.

Brucellosis is rare in the USA, largely due to our vaccination practices in cattle to prevent brucellosis. There are about 120 reported cases in people each year. Most cases of brucellosis in the USA occur in people who traveled to countries where brucellosis is more common and drank contaminated cow, sheep or goat milk or had contact with infected animals. Among cases in the USA who acquired brucellosis here, infections occur from contact with feral swine or, more rarely, dogs, or because of accidental exposure in lab settings.

Raw Milk: a Risk for Infections
-------------------------------
Raw milk and raw milk products are those that have not undergone a process called pasteurization that kills disease-causing germs. CDC recommends that people only drink milk that has been pasteurized to kill germs. Even healthy animals may carry germs that can contaminate milk. There is no substitute for pasteurization to assure that milk is safe to drink. The risk of getting sick from drinking raw milk is greater for infants and young children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems, such as people with cancer, an organ transplant, or HIV/AIDS. However, healthy people of any age can get very sick if they drink raw milk contaminated with harmful germs.

More info on raw milk:
< https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/raw-milk-index.html>.


----------



## haypoint

Tue 14 Nov


----------



## haypoint

Tue 14 Nov 2017
Source: New Jersey Herald [edited]
< http://www.njherald.com/20171114/state-doh-issues-cease-and-desist-orders-to-company-that-illegally-sold-raw-milk#>


The New Jersey Department of Health has issued cease-and-desist orders to Udder Milk, a home delivery company that has illegally sold unpasteurized milk in New Jersey.

State and federal officials are investigating to determine from which farms Udder Milk acquired its raw milk, after a North Jersey woman became ill with a rare bacterial infection, the department said. 

"It is illegal in New Jersey to sell or distribute raw milk or products made from raw milk, such as yogurt, soft cheese and ice cream," State Epidemiologist Dr. Tina Tan said. "People should know that, in general, unpasteurized milk may contain dangerous bacteria, and those who have become ill after consuming raw milk products should immediately consult a medical professional. Pasteurized milk and dairy products bought commercially are considered safe for consumption, because they are heated to a high temperature that kills harmful bacteria."

The United States Department of Agriculture, the CDC, and the Department's Public Health and Food Protection Program, with the cooperation of the New Jersey Department of Agriculture, are investigating to determine the suppliers. DOH was notified on 23 Oct
2017 that a North Jersey woman tested positive for _Brucella_ RB51 infection, and she has since recovered. It marked the 2nd [reported] case associated with raw milk consumption confirmed in the United States in 2017. The Texas Department of State Health Services, with assistance from CDC, is investigating _Brucella abortus_ RB51 exposures and illnesses connected to a dairy company in Paradise, Texas that also sells raw milk products.

_Brucella_ bacteria are primarily passed among infected animals. While rare, people can become infected by eating or drinking contaminated raw milk products. A brucellosis infection can cause a range of symptoms including fever, sweats, chills, weight loss, headache, fatigue and muscle and joint pain. Symptoms may appear up to 6 months after exposure. In severe cases, infections of the central nervous system or lining of the heart may occur.

People who may have consumed contaminated milk should see a doctor right away. _Brucella_ RB51 cannot be diagnosed through tests commonly used to diagnose the disease, and this strain is resistant to one of the antimicrobials commonly used to treat brucellosis in people.

> From 1993 through 2012, 127 outbreaks linked to raw milk were reported
to CDC, resulting in 1909 illnesses and 144 hospitalizations. Between
2012 and 2016, only 3 New Jersey cases were reported.

All suspected and confirmed cases of brucellosis are immediately reportable to the local health department where the patient resides.

[Related to the previous Texas case related to unpasteurized milk contaminated from _B. abortus_ strain RB51, CDC and Texas health officials had received reports about people who drank K-Bar milk or have symptoms consistent with brucellosis caused by RB51 in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Ohio, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas, but not New Jersey. This may be a separate case.

RB51 is a weakened strain of _Brucella_ used to vaccinate young female cattle against infection with more pathogenic strains of _Brucella_.
Vaccinating cows with the RB51 vaccine helps prevent abortions in cows and reduces the risk of people coming into contact with cows infected with more severe strains of _Brucella_. However, in rare cases, vaccinated cows can shed RB51 in their milk.

ProMED would appreciate more information about this case and any others in New Jersey and whether they are related to the Texas case


----------



## MichaelZ

This summer, on July 4th, my son fainted at his job and threw up. He was taken in to the hospital but released the same day. Probable cause was something he ate or drank. We suspect it was raw milk he drank. I drank some of the same milk, however, without a problem. But that was the last raw milk we had around here. Just seems too risky - one tiny bit of contamination can go a long way.


----------



## haypoint

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucel...you-drank-raw-milk-see-a-doctor/#13b2b9d46854

There is a video and more, here is a bit of this Forbes article:

"While drinking milk may give you a milk moustache, brucellosis can lead to inflamed, severely painful and swollen testicles (among other problems). Not exactly the stuff for a raw milk ad campaign. As the CDC described, initial symptoms can include fever, sweats, fatigue, weakness, loss of appetite, headache, or muscle, joint, or back pain. The infection may then go to the inside lining of heart and cause endocarditis, which can destroy the heart valves and eventually lead to death. It may also affect and damage the joints leading to a chronic arthritis. The spleen and liver may swell as well. Infection of the central nervous system can lead to meningitis or encephalitis, which both can be life threatening. Then there's the testicles thing, if you have testicles. Although a six-to-eight week course of antibiotics (usually doxycycline and rifampin) can eliminate the infection, despite treatment, symptoms may last for a long time or even forever, especially if permanent damage has occurred"


----------



## haypoint

Another confirmed case:


People who purchased raw whole milk from Pot 'O Gold Dairy Specialties in Bear Lake, Warren county are asked to throw it out after it was linked to cases of salmonellosis, the Pennsylvania Department of Health announced [Fri 12 Oct 2018].

Raw whole milk was sold from 10 Sep 2018 to the present in glass, half-gallon containers with the Pot O' Gold label at 16 stores in Crawford, Erie, McKean, Venango, and Warren counties.

So far 9 cases of salmonellosis have been reported. It causes diarrhea, fever, abdominal cramps, and vomiting. While most recover in
4 to 7 days, salmonellosis can be more serious in older adults, infants, and those with chronic illnesses. Anyone who consumed the milk and became ill should consult their physicians. This is reportedly only linked to the raw whole milk product.

The raw whole milk was sold at these locations:
- Crawford county:
Buck and Kathy, Titusville
D&J Bakery, Cambridge Springs
Miller's Country Store, Cochranton
- Erie county:
Corry Lumber, Corry
Duran's Farm Fresh Products, Waterford
Edinboro Market, Edinboro
Orton's Fruit Market, North East
Sander's Market, Corry
- McKean county:
Circle K Feeds, Kane
- Venango county:
Farmer's Daughter's Country Market
- Warren county:
Kondak's Market, Clarendon
Lottsville Milling, Lottsville
Scandia General Store, Scandia
Shell Service Center, Warren
Town and Country Store, Sugar Grove
Youngsville Hardware, Youngsville


----------



## barnbilder

CDC=Fake News. Yawn. Food safety concerning milk. Oh the irony. The stuff is basically hazardous waste in any form. Soy milk is much healthier.


----------



## haypoint

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


----------



## shawnlee

Its pretty simple...nasty things from nasty places make you sick...…..


It is a roll of the dice every time you eat anything you did not grow or prepare.....its all good with that inspected milk until whack job poisons it in the store or minimum wage boy lets it sit in aisle 3 for couple hours unrefridgerated.


I find commercial things sketchy, but they have to pass inspections and the product gets sanitized/filtered and inspected.

There is no way I am drinking raw uninspected milk from a commercial source...….drank plenty I pulled from the cow myself when I was young...……


Udder was cleaned with something...too young to remember, hands got cleaned, stainless bucket that was bleached/sanitized was used to hand milk into, then it went into the dairy fridge in a big stainless bowl that had a spigot on the bottom and sat to separate, then it was spigoted out into sanitized glass 1/2 gallons and taken inside to the house fridge to be consumed.

How long it was cooled for before taking it inside I do not remember and how long it stayed in the fridge in the house I do not remember, I just remember it being really good tasting. There might have been a step in there I missed too.....


Point is, there is no way I would trust that to be pulled off in a milk for profit commercial farm...….their regular store milk might be fine, but no way on the commercial raw uninspected.


----------



## haypoint

shawnlee said:


> How long it was cooled for before taking it inside I do not remember and how long it stayed in the fridge in the house I do not remember, I just remember it being really good tasting. There might have been a step in there I missed too.....


Likely was first filtered through a paper filter (like a big coffee filter) or a clean cloth. That gets out the bits of straw, dander, stray flake of manure and the occasional fly. Rapid cooling and kept cold is important in that it slows the growth/multiplication of pathogens.
The rub in this is when healthy looking cows shed dangerous bacteria in their milk, like Campylobacter and tuberculosis. In Michigan, in recent years, over 40 herds of cattle contracted tuberculosis from wildlife. The cows looked healthy.


----------



## coolrunnin

barnbilder said:


> CDC=Fake News. Yawn. Food safety concerning milk. Oh the irony. The stuff is basically hazardous waste in any form. Soy milk is much healthier.


Soy anything isn't good for you.


----------



## haypoint

coolrunnin said:


> Soy anything isn't good for you.


and heaven forbid you'd feed dogs grain. Gees, where do people get these misconception?


----------



## barnbilder

haypoint said:


> Likely was first filtered through a paper filter (like a big coffee filter) or a clean cloth. That gets out the bits of straw, dander, stray flake of manure and the occasional fly. Rapid cooling and kept cold is important in that it slows the growth/multiplication of pathogens.
> The rub in this is when healthy looking cows shed dangerous bacteria in their milk, like Campylobacter and tuberculosis. In Michigan, in recent years, over 40 herds of cattle contracted tuberculosis from wildlife. The cows looked healthy.


There is no safe food in Michigan. They allow the practice of raising wildlife for canned hunts, and the disease risk from such activities makes it impossible to safely raise any form of livestock there. There is simply too much profit involved to prevent people from importing from somewhere they shouldn't. A lot of the prion diseases could be caused by some of the questionable feeding practices used on the canned hunt facilities to promote antler growth. Then there is the whole issue of confined animals that consort through the fence with wild animals of the same species. They get exposed to who knows what from exotic food, late night , back road imports, and then store pathogens in a wild reservoir. Wild reservoir frolics in the field that grows livestock feed. It's a natural disaster waiting to happen.


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> “There is no safe food in Michigan.”
> 
> Michigan has the safest food in the world. Fresh water, fresh air and among the greatest variety of fruits and vegetables. Agriculture, through diversity, has grown from 76 billion, a few years ago to over 100 billion today. Pure Michigan.
> 
> “They allow the practice of raising wildlife for canned hunts, and the disease risk from such activities makes it impossible to safely raise any form of livestock there.”
> 
> All deer imported to Michigan for captive deer ranches are tested and inspected by a veterinarian. Each facility must maintain 10 feet tall fences. The heads of all deer that are killed r die, must be sent to a laboratory at MSU, tested for TB and CWD.
> 
> “There is simply too much profit involved to prevent people from importing from somewhere they shouldn't.”
> 
> Raising captive deer is a costly investment. All purchases are restricted to certified free of TB and CWD. Failure to comply with those regulations results in quarantine and eradication of all cervids on that facility. Huge fines and jail time. It just isn’t worth violating the laws.
> 
> “ A lot of the prion diseases could be caused by some of the questionable feeding practices used on the canned hunt facilities to promote antler growth.”
> 
> Did you just make that up? Since when did ground spinal columns grow antlers?
> 
> Then there is the whole issue of confined animals that consort through the fence with wild animals of the same species.
> 
> Any facts or photos to back that up? Which is putting which at risk?
> 
> “They get exposed to who knows what from exotic food, late night , back road imports, and then store pathogens in a wild reservoir. Wild reservoir frolics in the field that grows livestock feed. It's a natural disaster waiting to happen.”
> 
> Now that’s funny. Now I know you are just pulling my leg. ‘exotic food, late night, back road imports’ Har har.Next the confined, heavily tested and regulated are a threat to the wild deer? I think those invested in confined deer are more worried about those wild deer that carry CWD and TB (without any help from those back roads) infecting their investment than the other way around.
> 
> Michigan has TB in the deer. Michigan has led the nation in TB testing of cattle. Michigan has the nation’s best cattle traceback system. Several other states have TB in cattle. Several states have CWD in their wild deer herd.
> 
> What does this have to do with people getting sick due to drinking raw milk?


----------



## barnbilder

Some people are blind to actual industry practices. Others think that the most exemplary models of industry are the norm. Some people are even naive enough to think that rules are always followed. Some people are even inexperienced enough to think that fences are somehow permanent structures. Michigan is a fallen tree away from a huge zoonotic disease outbreak.


----------



## Oxankle

I do not nunderstand why people with common sense will drink raw milf from a cow they do not tend themselves. For centuries farm families kept a milk cow and used the milk, the cream, butter and cheeses from that milk. They also saw to it that the cow's teats were washed before milking, that the pails and crocks were clean and that hair and trash did not fall into the milk bucket.

I've thrown away many a pail of milk and had to go wash the bucket and start over because the old cow kicked, or swished her tail or because I missed a spot of mud on her udder and that spot fell into the bucket. Sometimes that turned into three trips to the barn but the old cow cared not a whit. If I came in with a gallon instead of two and a half MAMA cared, but not that old tested, washed and dried cow.


----------



## emdeengee

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread. I was able to use information on it to find other information to convince a friend of ours who raises goats and was using the raw milk for drinking and cheese and yogurt to pasteurize. He has been ill on and off for months with flu like symptoms.


----------



## haypoint

barnbilder said:


> Michigan is a fallen tree away from a huge zoonotic disease outbreak.


I have no clue what you are referring to. I cannot see what your comments have to do with raw milk.


----------



## haypoint

"The CDC has announced that milk from a Pennsylvania farm, which has been linked to an antimicrobial-resistant bacterium, sold in Iowa.
According to the CDC, 3 cases of brucellosis were directly connected to milk consumed from Miller's Biodiversity Farm in Quarryville, PA.
The milk was shipped to retailers across the state and in 18 other states.

People who have consumed raw milk or milk product from this dairy may have been exposed to _Brucella [abortus_ strain] RB51, a cattle vaccine strain that can be shed in milk and cause infection in humans.

Symptoms of brucellosis include fever, sweats, malaise, anorexia, headache, fatigue, muscle and joint point and potentially more serious conditions. Infections have also been associated with miscarriage in pregnant patients. Symptoms can appear anywhere between 5 days and 6 months after exposure. At this time, no cases of brucellosis linked to this outbreak have been confirmed in Iowa."

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com


----------



## Ziptie

I can't open the link, but as far as I know around here in Iowa raw milk is illegal to sell.


----------



## haypoint

https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2019...ted-with-brucellosis-after-drinking-raw-milk/
"There is an even more immediate health threat to people who have had unpasteurized, raw dairy products from Miller’s Biodiversity Farm in Quarryville, PA, in recent months. Even if they haven’t developed symptoms of Brucella infection, they should immediately seek medical attention, according to the CDC."


----------



## Oxankle

Bangs disease has been eradicated in most states, but ranchers claim that deer herds spread it. Drinking raw milk from cows not tested bangs-free is foolhardy. Even tested cows can be infected after the tests. I would not drink raw milk from a cow I did not own, tend, have tested and milk on my own place.


----------

