OT: health benefits of drinking raw milk

How about this paragraph:

"The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) says improperly handled raw milk is responsible for nearly three times more hospitalisations than any other food-borne disease outbreak, making it one of the world's

pasteurization can prevent include tuberculosis, brucellosis, diphtheria, scarlet fever, and Q-fever; it also kills the harmful bacteria Salmonella, Listeria, Yersinia, Campylobacter, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli O157:H7,[16][17] among others."

Joe Gwinn

Hi,

Bacteria don't invade healthy hosts regularly, it is uncommon. There has to be a compromised immunity for a pathogen to normally infect someone.

cheers, Jamie

I just looked around and that couple hundred is not right. It is supposedly more like 42 per year. The higher figure is probably cumulative. What's mo re there are factors that cannot be counted on, like any statistic. For one , not all milk related diseases come from raw milk. That's right, there is plenty of chance for it to get contaminated later. Another thing is that it is not always for sure that a disease like TB is from milk for sure, it is too communicable. It is to the point where they test people in certain occ upations or situations all the time because of this.

Another fact is of course that not all milk caused diseases, raw or not, ar e recognized as caused by milk, raw or not.

However the most interesting statistic I found is that about 3 % or so peop le drink raw milk. OIn tis country that is over 9 million.

So a couple hundred illnesses is stastically insignificant. As I said befor e, this does not warrant the meth lab treatment they give to those who dare trade raw milk. I would say of course that certain standards should be app lied, but making it illegal is uncalled for, absolutely.

Actually, if people saw how meat is processed most would be vegans. Talkk a bout E. coli ? Shit, that is in feces. And that is on your meat. What's mor e, it is on the surface so you can have a raw steak, but in ground meat it coulld be all the way through.

The food we eat is pretty damn gross really. The number indicate that there is an impetus fopr these laws that is NOT based on the lack of safety of r aw milk, but on the whims of the lobbyists working to the dairy industry.

And their propogand campaign seems to have worked. A coule hudred people a year, if it was even that, means absolutely nothing. It means you are more likely to get sick from eating a hot dog.

If people knew what was in those they would never eat them either.

Hi,

I read that but saw "[better source needed]" and it is true a better source is needed, the statement of raw milk being responsible for three times more hospitalizations than any other food born disease outbreak is a big statement to say, and it is not referenced to any paper.

cheers, Jamie

What's more there are factors that cannot be counted on, like any statistic. For one, not all milk related diseases come from raw milk.

That's right, there is plenty of chance for it to get contaminated later. Another thing is that it is not always for sure that a disease like

TB is from milk for sure, it is too communicable. It is to the point where they test people in certain occupations or situations all the time

because of this.

who dare trade raw milk. I would say of course that certain standards should be applied, but making it illegal is uncalled for, absolutely.

more, it is on the surface so you can have a raw steak, but in ground meat it coulld be all the way through.

of raw milk, but on the whims of the lobbyists working to the dairy industry.

more likely to get sick from eating a hot dog.

cheers, Jamie

Like I said, don't bother posting without substantiation. Your statements are not supported by the facts. I get infections of my toenail and there is nothing wrong with my immune system. I get a cold every winter. Does that mean I have an immune deficiency? I expect you are going to say "yes, if you have disease you must have a deficient immune system" which would complete the circle and prove my point that you have no basis for your opinions.

You might get away with that in Canada, but not in some states.

I think it was the supreme court in Wisconsin that ruled that you do not ha ve the fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of your choice.

Some free country eh ?

There were lgal tenets involving people's rights here. Not operating in com merce was part of it. the laws against raw milk of course would bar it from being sold in stores, at least as human food, but between two private indi viduals, since the substance is not actually a controlled substance, raw mi lk should not be affected.

However, the tone of the government when it comes to such things in the US has becaome draconian and totalitarianistic. Even owning shares in a cow n ow is scrutinized, and houses raided with SWAT teams and such. It has happe ned.

In some states, raw milk is allowed to be sold as pet food, and people get aorund it that way.

But you see, it is all a money game. If they can outlaw raw milk, then why can't they outlaw tobacco ? Which kills more ?

How come I can't dump motor oil but oil companies are allowed to frack whic h poisons the water table ? Now some states are outlawing it, and you know what is going to happen ? Same thing as the EU. the frackers will go to the feds just like the GMO people like Monsanto went to the EU to outlaw membe r countries fromk outlawing GMOs.

Funny, EU membership was sold to them as a trade agreement, what kind of tr ade agreement affect consumer health and safetly rules ? MAKE them allow yo u to sell tyour shit in your country, using an unelected (by your citizens anyway) bearocrats in another country ?

It is clear what is going on. New world order. Conspiracy theory ? Bush use d those words dozens of times. Obama just went to China to get them to "be a partner in ensuring world order". It is the consolidation of power, and t he alienation that comes with it.

Personally, I do whatever I want. they are lucky there are alot of things I do not want to do. I know what is going on, and so do they. You almost can 't turn around without breaking some sort of law, so selective enforcement gives themk another social engineering tool.

Some things they do are obviously to see how much we'll take. thart way the y can isolate the ones with a backbone for targeting.

You think I am kidding ?

So nine million people drink raw milk. Why aren't they all in jail ? Thwere are more unsolver murders in this country than solved. They don't even bot her looking for robbrs, and they just barely look for rapists if they know his name.

It is to protect and serve the government. And the governemnt is to serve t he will of big business.

There is no more fooling around. I am going to die with no kids so I do not care really. I mean I do just a tad, but not really. IfI had kids the last place I would be is in the US. Well one of the last, I certainly wouldn't go to the UK rither, or Zimbabwe. If Chavez was still alive I might conside r Venezuela.

That is the reply I was waiting for. Notice they don't say anything about this being part of a study. How many children were involved? Was it the same 70? I doubt it, 14 cases of TB out of 70 children would have been a scandal. I expect it was NATIONALLY! So 70 cases of TB out of many millions of children vs 1 in 70. 1 in 70 alone is a HUGE rate of TB infection. If the TB infection rate were that high we would declare a national emergency to put an end to it.

study:

Well not always. It is illegal to sell or buy raw milk in Canada and many other jurisdictions. Then what do you do? Buy a part interest in a cow.

?-)

So instead of misinterpreting the stuff you referenced when starting this thread, why don't you dig around a little and find good references that show just how dangerous milk can be at spreading disease?

Bye, I hope you have a nice trip.

This is why you are a fruitcake. People show you information about how milk can cause disease and you reject it for a variety of reasons, basically whatever pops into your mind at the moment. But when someone pulls a number out of their butt that says you are right, you don't question it one little bit.

That 9 million raw milk drinkers in the US is total BS. I'm pretty sure you can't find 1 in 30 who even know where to get raw milk. I know I don't.

You know why the taw milk advocate quit drinking milk? The cow fell on him. I don't have to worry about that!

any

. "

have the fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of your choice.

You have the right to get as sick as you like, but if you start infecting o ther people, you are interfering with their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Typhoid Mary is the post-child here.

Your own freedom is always constrained when your freedom interferes with th e lives of other people.

Getting infected with TB and proceeding to infect other people is downright anti-social. Jamie may be too ill-informed to realise that that's what his enthusiasm for raw milk is doing to himself and his family, and how it's p utting his friends and neighbours at risk, but his neighbours could get jus t as sick from his ignorance as they would have done if he'd done it malici ously.

I do not reject it, I question the figures. I question the validity of thei r assertion of the cause.

Let me pose this question :

If people are getting TB from raw milk, where the hell did the cows get it ?

Do YOU have an answer for that ? More importantly do THEY have an answer fo r that.

They have all kinds of cool math now. The cost of living is not rising much . you can get an ipad for less. Eat an ipad. Unemployment is down,.. that i s people actively seeking work is down. People actually collecting UI benef its is down. but they are still not employed. bu the economy is doing great , when you factor in the profits made by banks. Real goods ? Oh, that doesn 't matter any more.

That is why our debt is so low and China's is so high. these figures about health, nutrition and that, we must be right because we got more obesity, h eart disease, diabetes and all that than just about anywhere. Our medicine is so good we are almost up to third world levels in infant mortality.

And we pay more for it.

I will try to poke holes in anything. I am not saying pasteurization is no t beneficial like some do, it is a matter of degree. Like I do not believe they got ebola really under control. if they did, NOBODY would have caught it. Is this fear ? Hell no, the people with it are thousands of miles away from me. But when I cast doubt on a medical industry that kills more people than the war in Syria EVERY YEAR being able to contain one of the most dea dly diseases in history, I am a fruitcake, a tin hatter, a fearmonger.

OK then.

er

can still get bovine TB and other infections. They may get

long before the days of dairy farming. Our doctor was on the

ching the kids who drink it and going after the milk supplier

in practice none of them. They can still get sick from infections

d of rural idiots who drink raw milk and take the risk of feeding

being exposed to the same number of infectious agents as the Pasteurised

exposed to infectious agents less often - the extra infectious agents in

udy, no matter how often we point it out to you.

You are too dim to realise that drinking raw milk is stupid, and too dim to realise that rural settings make it easier for people to make stupid choic es, because there is less social interaction and silly ideas get challenged less often.

By the same token, the immune systems of people living in rural areas get c hallenged less often - or at least challenged less often by pathogens carri ed by other human beings. This does make living in rural areas a healthier way to live. If become a hermit and don't talk to anybody else at all you'l l be even less likely to get a cold. Of course, if you do get sick, nobody will notice, let alone stick you into a car and drive you off to hospital, which may explain why deeply rural areas in Australia have lower life expec tancies - at least for males.

the >lives of other people."

If you ever catch me forcing anyone to drink or eat anything against their will, I will hand you a loaded gun and you can shoot me, OK ?

Should they sell raw milk in the stores next to the Cheerios ? Probably not , and oif they did, there should be a BIG warning on it, like there should be on GMOs, but there isn't. They do not want people to get used to making intelligent decisions (I know someone who got sick on that shit so...), no, they want to make the decision for you and they want you to get used to it .

Did you understand anything that Bill wrote?

I can agree with that.

OK then.

eir assertion of the cause.

t ?

In the UK, they get it from badgers ... In general wild life sustains a var iety of chronic infections that don't do much damage to the creatures the i nfections evolved to live in forever, without killing their hosts, but when these infections move to a new host, they can become unreasonably successf ul, and kill the new hosts. In evolutionary terms it pays them not to kill the new host, but rather to colonise them and have them keep on infecting n ew hosts for the term of the first host's natural life, but provided the fi rst new host doesn't drop dead before it can infect another new host or two that evolutionary process will proceed rather slowly.

The Black Plague killed about 30% of the humans it infected, and Ebola kill s closer to 50%, both within a few days. TB takes years to kill it's victim s, and it's victims infect other people for the entire time. The TB bug is presumably evolving towards a strain that won't ever kill you, and will let you keep on infecting people until you die of some other cause, while lett ing your immune system protect you against more dangerous strains of TB, bu t it hasn't happened yet, and the general opinion is that we'd do better to kill off TB completely (as we did with smallpox and have some hope of doin g with polio) rather than wait for evolution to run its course.

for that.