Raw Grass-Fed Milk - Much Safer Than Pasteurized!
The contrasts between "the two milks" from the "two kinds of dairy cows" at two very different kinds of farms.
Date: 9/16/2015 8:18:47 AM ( 6 y ) ... viewed 1834 times
October 23, 2018 - What Pasteurization Does To The Vitamins In Milk - By: Sally Fallon Morell -
“Pasteurization of milk ensures safety for human consumption by reducing the number of viable pathogenic bacteria.” So begins an article published in the Journal of Food Protection, published in 2011.
What Pasteurization Does To The Vitamins In Milk - According to the study authors, one argument against pasteurization is its association “with destruction of selected vitamins present in raw milk.” This statement is not completely accurate, and we will return to it in a moment. Nonetheless, the direct effect of pasteurization on vitamin levels is important to know. The researchers looked at studies measuring vitamins A, B1, B2, B6, B12, C, E and folate, eliminating many for various reasons, some or all of which seem frivolous—such as not published in English, not reporting sample size, not including a standard deviation, not reporting mean values. Nevertheless, even after leaving out over half the studies looking at vitamins levels published between 1936 and 2003, the researchers came up with interesting results.
Starting with the fat-soluble vitamins, studies on vitamin A were inconsistent, with two studies reporting a reduction and—strangely—two reporting an increase in vitamin A after pasteurization. (The suspicion is that vitamin A was added to the pasteurized milk.) The available data did not allow the researchers to make important conclusions about vitamin E, although “pasteurization appeared to qualitatively reduce concentrations” of vitamin E. They did not examine vitamin D “because secreted bovine milk is deficient in vitamin D based on human nutrition needs.” Vitamin K2 was not on the radar screen until very recently, so the researchers did not look at this fat-soluble vitamin either.
Looking at the water-soluble vitamins, researchers found a significant decrease for vitamins B12, B2 and folate, with a slight decrease in vitamins B1 and B6. As for vitamin C, “In the majority of trials, a numeric decrease in vitamin C was found after heat treatment.”
These results are pretty shocking. Every water-soluble vitamin decreased, some significantly. But not to worry, say the researchers, since “milk is not an important source of vitamin C and folate,” nor of vitamin B12! Only the reduction of B2 has them a little worried: “With the exception of vitamin B2, pasteurization does not appear to be a concern in diminishing the nutritive value of milk because milk is often not a primary source of these studied vitamins in the North American diet.” Put another way, “The effect [of pasteurization] on milk’s nutritive value was minimal because many of these vitamins are naturally found in relatively low levels.”
Note the word “often.” Milk “is often not a primary source of these studied vitamins. . ." For someone not drinking milk, or drinking little milk, this statement is true. But what about babies and toddlers? Milk is often a primary source of these nutrients for this group. And what about a mom worried about her children’s junk food habits or pickiness, who wants to ensure that her children at least get the basics of what they need. Raw milk can be a primary source of these nutrients for these children. And what about vegetarians depending on milk for vitamin B12? The destruction of B12 by pasteurization could be disastrous for these folks.
But let’s go back to the premise that people are opposed to pasteurization because it destroys vitamins in the milk. Indeed, it does, but this is only half the story. What pasteurization completely destroys is the enzymes—after all, the test for effective pasteurization is the destruction of the enzyme phosphatase–and many of these enzymes act as carriers for the vitamins and minerals in the milk. This explains why levels of some vitamins in milk seem low—since the enzymes in raw milk ensure that they are completely absorbed, the levels do not need to be high.
The researchers did not even examine vitamin D levels on the assumption that there is not enough vitamin D in milk to satisfy human needs. If this is the case, where do infant humans and animals get their vitamin D? The fact is that vitamin D is very difficult to measure in foods, and also vitamin D levels vary widely depending on the diet of the human mother—and presumably depending on the diet of the animal mother also.
Pasteurization destroys the enzymes and carrier proteins needed to absorb calcium, folate, B12, B6, vitamins A and D, iron and many other minerals. To absorb these nutrients in pasteurized milk, the body has to produce its own enzymes, something that takes a lot of energy to do, especially in amounts required to ensure 100 percent assimilation.
Vitamin C - Raw milk but not pasteurized can resolve scurvy. “. . . Without doubt. . . the explosive increase in infantile scurvy during the latter part of the 19th century coincided with the advent of use of heated milks. . .” Rajakumar, Pediatrics. 2001;108(4):E76
Calcium - Longer and denser bones on raw milk. Studies from Randleigh Farms.
Folate - Carrier protein inactivated during pasteurization. Gregory. J. Nutr. 1982, 1329-1338.
Vitamin B12 - Binding protein inactivated by pasteurization.
Vitamin B6 - Animal studies indicate B6 poorly absorbed from pasteurized milk. Studies from Randleigh Farms.
Vitamin A - Beta-lactoglobulin, a heat-sensitive protein in milk, increases intestinal absorption of vitamin A. Heat degrades vitamin A. Said and others. Am J Clin Nutr . 1989;49:690-694. Runge and Heger. J Agric Food Chem. 2000 Jan;48(1):47-55.
Vitamin D - Present in milk bound to lactoglobulins, pasteurization cuts assimilation in half. Hollis and others. J Nutr. 1981;111:1240-1248; FEBS Journal 2009 2251-2265.
Iron - Lactoferrin, which contributes to iron assimilation, destroyed during pasteurization. Children on pasteurized milk tend to anemia.
Minerals Bound to proteins, inactivated by pasteurization; Lactobacilli, destroyed by pasteurization, enhance mineral absorption. BJN 2000 84:S91-S98; MacDonald and others. 1985.
So despite assurances by apologists for pasteurization, heat treating Nature’s perfect food does have a negative effect on the amount of nutrients and their availability—a profoundly negative effect.
One more thing: most of the studies the researchers had available were for regular pasteurization, not for ultra-high temperature (UHT) pasteurization—and most milk today, even organic milk, is ultra-pasteurized. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the additional heat pretty much kills everything.
What emerges is a story of the most colossal waste—think of the nutrients that our growing children are not getting, but should be getting, because we pasteurize!
The Weston A. Price Foundation is America’s leading champion of raw milk, especially raw whole milk from pastured cows. Visit their raw milk website at realmilk.com.
October 1, 2018 - "Conclusions" -
From: "Recent Trends in Unpasteurized Fluid Milk Outbreaks, Legalization, and Consumption in the United States -
September 13, 2018 · Research Article":
From a public health perspective, the lack of consistency and comprehensiveness in measuring production or consumption of unpasteurized milk is problematic; however, this analysis provides a current best estimate of the scale of disease outbreaks due to unpasteurized milk. The potential for foodborne illness continues to be a small but real risk from consuming unpasteurized fluid milk, but analysis of data over a twelve year period demonstrates that increased access to this product within the United States has not led to increased outbreak rates. On the contrary, total reported unpasteurized milk-associated outbreaks have declined since 2011, despite increased production, and outbreak rates proportional to estimated consumption rates have declined by 74% over the twelve year period.
The evidence that legalization of unpasteurized milk has correlated with decreased outbreak rates has potential implications for public policy decisions. Recent introduction of on-farm food safety training programs for unpasteurized milk producers may be a factor in the recent decline in outbreak rates. Further studies of the efficacy of such “best-practices” training will be necessary in determining the utility and efficacy of these risk-management options, and could enable the transition from prohibition-based to harm reduction-based regulatory structures. This in turn will enable the further development safe and minimally processed dairy products, to take advantage of the enormous public health benefits that would result from a significantly lower incidence of infections and allergic disorders provided by consumption of fresh, unprocessed milk.
Referred to (and via a hot-link) in an update today from the "Raw Milk Institute".
September 16, 2015 - Opening post -
Producers of organic raw milk, which is a far superior food product, present a significant economic threat to the larger pasteurized milk industry, so when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sends in armed agents to shut down a raw milk producer, it's really nothing more than a Mafia strong arm tactic aimed at shutting down the competition. It has absolutely nothing to do with consumer safety.
The FDA warns that raw milk can carry disease-causing bacteria, but what they completely overlook is the fact that these bacteria are the result of industrial farming practices that lead to diseased animals, which may then in turn produce contaminated milk. The two are not interchangeable, yet they make no distinction whatsoever between disease-riddled factory farmed milk and the milk from clean, healthy, and grass-fed cows...
You definitely want to avoid drinking raw milk from a conventionally-raised feed-lot cow. But drinking raw milk produced by grass-fed cows from clean, well-run farms is actually far LESS dangerous than drinking pasteurized milk. Not only does raw milk contain good bacteria that are essential for a healthy digestive system and help "crowd out" pathogens, high-quality raw organic milk also has its own built in "immune system" that actually protects you against food poisoning. Pasteurized milk does not have this protective quality.
The reason why the dairy industry is so threatened by small-scale organic dairy farms is because they simply cannot produce safe raw milk in a confined animal feeding operation (CAFO), and therefore they cannot compete for a share of the raw milk market.
In fact, CAFO milk is so hazardous that despite pasteurization, data12 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows there are about 412 confirmed cases of people getting ill from pasteurized milk each year. Meanwhile, only about 116 illnesses a year are linked to raw milk. Yet you never hear about armed raids on CAFOs, do you? That's because they don't occur, despite the fact they pose a far greater risk to your health.
According to research by Dr. Ted Beals, MD, featured in the summer 2011 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, you are about 35,000 times more likely to get sick from other foods than you are from raw milk, so truly, if the government allows us to play Russian Roulette with pasteurized dairy products and other inspected-yet-still-contaminated foods, we really should be allowed to drink raw milk and eat privately slaughtered beef if we so choose...
But the fight for food freedom isn't just for those who happen to love raw milk — it's for everyone who wants to be able to obtain the food of their choice from the source of their choice.
After many dietary experiments over forty five years I now can confidently say that raw milk is as close as it gets to a most perfect food! Cultured milk is even better as it is more digestible. And goat milk is the top of the rock!:
I've had the very best energy on a diet consisting mostly of cultured goat milk, goat whey and some home made kombucha. Food cravings disappeared! I wasn't born and raised on a farm but now having a farm-based community is my ultimate dream!:
And if the testimonial of one is insufficient then consider the findings of Weston A. Price in Nutrition and Physical degeneration; Francis Pottenger: Pottengers's Cats; Bernard Jensen: Goat Milk Magic; Rudolf Steiner lectures on nutrition; http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/19090108p01.html
Whole, raw, grass-fed milk is real food and one of the greatest forms of real nourishment!
I highly recommend some form of cow/goat milk shares or the like. Nothing beats having a direct connection to the source! The closer the better. Dr. Jensen advocated drinking the goat milk while it was still warm from the goat! That's because there is a finer life force that is transmitted through the milk that's at it's peak right upon milking. It is a great part of my inspiration for co-creating a farm-based community.
October 3, 2016 - Raw milk is not a health threat to anyone!
"... Raw milk opponents cite a 'study' from Johns Hopkins University which claims that you are 150 times more likely to contract illness from raw milk than from pasteurized. However, the authors of this study left out important data to obtain this result. When the appropriate data is used, the results show that you are 11 times more likely to contract illness from pasteurized milk than raw [http://www.realmilk.com/safety/the-johns-hopkins-raw-milk-study/].
Raw milk is no threat to anyone. Numerous peer reviewed studies show that when pathogens are added to raw milk, they do not increase but instead decline and disappear. No other food has this ability to kill pathogens (Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1982;44(5):1154-58; Mikrobiyolji Bul,1987:21(3):200-5; . Life Sciences, 2000;66(25):2433-9; Indian J Experimental Biology, 1998;36:808-10; J. Food Protection,63: 916-920; Letters in Applied Microbiology 1999 28(1):89-92; Australian Journal of Dairy Technology 1999 54(2):90-93; Milchwissenschaft 2000 55(5):249-252; Journal of Food Protection 1997 60(6):610-613).
Using government statistics, we can show that you are 35,000 times more likely to contract illness from other foods than from raw milk [http://www.realmilk.com/safety/those-pathogens-what-you-should-know/].
Since 1966, there have been 153,657 illnesses and 73 deaths from pasteurized milk and pasteurized milk products in the U.S.During that same 50-year period, there have been about 2500 reported illnesses (most of them not proven) and 0 deaths from raw milk and raw milk products in the U.S."
September 1, 2017 - Underscoring that pasteurization "has absolutely nothing to do with consumer safety".
"No pasteurization method will permanently eliminate all pathogens. Milk is as good a growth medium for bacteria after heat treatment as before. But every change in the (dairy) industry in the last fifty years has altered the bacteriological playing field in unforeseen ways, inevitably offering new opportunities for the wicked to flourish in bacteria land. The greater the volume of milk in pasteurization facilities, the wider the effect of anything that happens to go wrong. An early example occurred in 1927, when a basic hygiene error at a Montreal dairy plant led to an outbreak of some five thousand typhoid cases, with 533 deaths.
Cheers to raw milk!
 H .S . Adams, Milk and Food Sanitation Practice (New York: Commonwealth Fund, 1947), 6.
“In Bacteria Land”: The Battle over Raw Milk Author(s): Anne Mendelson
Source: Gastronomica: The Journal of Food and Culture, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 35-43 Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/gfc.2011.11.1.35.
raw milk, pasteurized milk industry, industrial farming, factory farmed milk, grass-fed cows, feed-lot cow, digestive system, small-scale organic dairy farms, confined animal feeding operation, cafo, goat milk, bernard jensen, pathogenic bacteria
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!Print this page
Email this page