>Hugh,
>
>"And we get some types we wouldn't have seen in raw milk, such as
>Listeria and Pasteurella." - is wrong. Listeria is found, if found,
>exclusively in raw milk. For that reason pregnant women are adviced to
>avoid dairy products made from fresh milk (here in Norway few years ago
>few dozens of women had miscarriages after eating French cammember
>cheese).
>
>Also I would never test my immunity drinking milk that might have
>tuberculosis. Strenght or weaknes of our immune system depends on so
>many factors.
>
>Regards
>
>Zoran

Dear Zoran,

Sorry. I stand corrected on the Listeria. Thanks.

I don't think that anyone "tests their immunity" by deliberately drinking
milk that might have tuberculosis in it. But, of course, there is some
slight possibility of one's family milk cow having a touch of Johnne's
Disease, otherwise known as bovine tuberculosis. There is a much better
chance of it being in raw milk that is pooled from four or five dairies of
a hundred cows each, which is what usually happens when milk is picked up
in a tank truck.

This means, of course, that pasteurization of commercial milk is very much
the rule because there IS a fairly good likelihood of something like
tuberculosis being present when you have hundreds and hundreds of cows
involved.

The point is that our immunity DOES depend on many, many factors,not all of
which are known but some of which we know are in raw milk and are destroyed
by pasteurization. Food researchers such as Sally Fallon often point out
that laboratory animals raised on raw milk as compared to those raised on
pasteurized milk consistantly prove to be healthier and more robust. I
don't know of quite so much evidence comparing people raised on raw milk as
compared to pasteurized milk. If one had the raw milk of good quality
available and knew the difference I'd think a parent would be criminal to
feed their children the pasteurized stuff.

There used to be a disease known as undulunt fever that was transmitted by
raw milk. I never hear of it any more, though a hundred years ago it was
quite common. A person who got it might keep it for life, and it would
flare up every once in a while. I think pasteurization can be credited for
its virtual disappearance. On the other hand this is not the case with
tuberculosis. Tuberculosis is all too common today and it hasn't been seen
to diminish much because of milk pasteurization. The study I ran into that
compared raw milk drinkers--who got no tuberculosis--with pasteurized milk
drinkers--several of whom got tuberculosis--warrants further investigation.
Are the immune factors in raw milk responsible for immunity to
tuberculosis? Considering there are antibiotic resistant strains of
tuberculosis that you definitely do NOT want to get, someone ought to look
at this more.

Best,
Hugh
Visit our website at: www.unionag.org

Reply via email to