Crossposted from https://scribe.disroot.org/post/9428370
- Raw Milk on the Rise: Driven by political shifts and wellness trends, unpasteurized milk has moved from a fringe obsession to a widespread movement rooted in institutional distrust.
- The Myth of Safety: Despite stringent hygiene efforts, contamination from deadly bacteria like E. coli and salmonella remains an inherent, unavoidable risk in unpasteurized dairy.
- A Political Shield: As raw milk continues to sicken consumers, high-level lawmakers and government officials are championing the industry’s expansion rather than curbing the danger.
…
If you trust 150 years of bedrock science, [raw milk] offers little reason to consume. By definition, it has not been pasteurized, the simple process of heating milk to kill off harmful bacteria. Before the practice was widely adopted a century ago, thousands of babies died each year from illnesses linked to contaminated dairy. Today, most scientists and health experts agree that raw milk has no significant, proven nutritional benefits over its sanitized counterpart, cannot treat or cure disease and subjects its consumers to over 100 times the risk of foodborne illness, which can be especially dangerous for young children.
And yet, McAfee’s farm, the largest raw-milk dairy in the country, is pulling in about $30 million a year, meeting a growing demand from customers who say they want food that hasn’t been robbed of health benefits by industrial processing.
…
Regulators have linked Mark McAfee’s raw dairy farm to more than a dozen recalls and outbreaks that left hundreds of people ill.
“I’ve put a couple kids in the hospital …,” McAfee acknowledged… “But here’s the thing: I’m a pioneer.”
…
Ah don’t trust no goddamn science wizards or their hoodoo mumbo jumbo.
They did their own research. Let them enjoy their freedom from ‘experts’.
You can’t expect everyone to research every product they come across. Some of these people are just victims who didn’t know any better, and most of them children.
Mary McGonigle-Martin was shopping in a Southern California grocery store in 2006 when she spotted ads suggesting McAfee’s milk could treat allergies and digestive problems. She thought of her 7-year-old son, Chris, who she suspected was dealing with dairy sensitivity, and later visited McAfee’s website to learn more. She knew the risks of forgoing pasteurization, but the site eased her concerns: It said the farm tested its milk and had never found a single pathogen.
So she started buying it, and her son started drinking it. And about a month later, he fell gravely ill. What began as a trip to the nearest hospital for bloody diarrhea turned into a race to save his life as his kidneys started to fail. Airlifted to a children’s hospital in Loma Linda, Chris was put in a medically induced coma. He spent nine days on a ventilator and 18 days on dialysis, during which time doctors gave him blood, platelet and plasma transfusions.
…
Chris suffered permanent kidney damage.
This is what the FDA used to control?
There are different rules for survival in a place where corporate profit is more valued than human life. Health Insurance companies will kill way more kids than this guy and his sales pitch. The bar for survival is getting higher, ‘she knew the risks’ but couldn’t spot the bullshit: the people who can might survive, and (maybe) their kids.
It’s like Nestle’s formula division setting up shop in North America instead of Africa. The WHO stepped in during that crisis, but I think the USA abandoned that safeguard too.
This is what the majority voted for. Freedom to do harm to fellow Americans. Deregulation. No experts. Survival of the fittest style freedom.
deleted by creator
TYFYS…killing republicans.
And “crunchy” people on the left or wherever. But mostly their children.
Yeah!
“But here’s the thing: I’m a pioneer.”
I pioneer in helping people earn Darwin awards.
Let me just have a quick epileptic seizure, I’ll be right back.
From the gif?? O.o
the whole raw milk fiasco is, of course, idiots running wild with only having partial information because they cant listen to a full explanation of anything as that would be inconvenient to their agendas…
There is some legitimate criticism against ultra pasteurization because it scalds things like milk at such an insanely high temperature, that it does indeed kill pathogens, but it also damages the nutrition and flavor as well, even though it only holds that temperature very briefly, typically 5 or less seconds.
lower temperature pasteurization, like flash pasteurization makes a better tasting product, thats still just as safe, because it uses half the temperature of ultra but has to hold it for 15-30 seconds… and in the world of MAKE MOAR MONEY FASTERER, thats just no good for the bottlers, even if it provides a product that is superior in taste and nutrition, but with the downfall of shelf life (but the shelf like is still like…2 weeks, and who is gonna keep milk around that long anyway)
of course, all the idiot brigade hears is “PASTEURIZATION BAD!” and come to the brilliantly stupid conclusion that, to get the most health benefit, that they gotta suck it straight from the dirt and shit covered teat.
Then have the audacity to act all shocked when they pick up all the shit-born diseases.
They also mess with the milk in additional ways. I didn’t realise how bad it had gotten until I started getting milk delivered from a local dairy. It’s still pasteurised, but closer to natural. I dread to think how bad it must be for you yanks.
I can easily see someone trying “raw” milk and discovering it tastes amazing by comparison. The conclusion that raw is better is wrong, but understandable. The middle ground is where the sweet spot is, safe, but as natural tasting as it can reasonably be.
They also mess with the milk in additional ways. I didn’t realise how bad it had gotten until I started getting milk delivered from a local dairy. It’s still pasteurised, but closer to natural. I dread to think how bad it must be for you yanks.
Yes, I literally covered lower temperature pasteurization in my post, and how it does taste better and have better nutrition.
lower temperature pasteurization, like flash pasteurization makes a better tasting product, thats still just as safe, because it uses half the temperature of ultra but has to hold it for 15-30 seconds… and in the world of MAKE MOAR MONEY FASTERER, thats just no good for the bottlers, even if it provides a product that is superior in taste and nutrition, but with the downfall of shelf life (but the shelf like is still like…2 weeks, and who is gonna keep milk around that long anyway)
also Ultra Pasteurization is not an American only thing. Europe, outside of like… the Nordic countries, loves and uses it too.
I was more referring to how they deal with the cream. They fully skim it out, then mix it back in to get the various types of milk. That processing is why you don’t need to shake supermarket milk to mix the cream back in before use. The oil droplets are FAR smaller, and it changes the mouth feel of the milt at the very least.
I’ve no proof, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t bother mixing the best parts of the cream back in. At least not in the ratios that came out originally.
I like milk, but to be honest, I don’t think it’s that healthy regardless how it was processed. I mean, the stuff is meant to let calves grow 75 kg in three months.
“You shouldnt do that because thats not how it is in nature” is logic that can be used to get rid of everything but raw, fur covered meat and water from our diet.
Sure, but I didn’t say that, I said I don’t think milk is the most healthy choice to begin with. I still drink it, like I also drink beer or soda or coffee or tea or water. Not raw water though, that stuff’s got bacteria.
Of course his last name is McAfee.
