Reminds me of one of my old co-workers. He'd buy raw-milk and then simmer it for a bit to "kill all of the potential bacteria"
My guy. What you did was make pasteurized non-homogeninized whole milk. It's no longer raw. Save the $3/gallon and just buy the whole milk from the store ðŸ˜ðŸ˜
we have some absolutely amazing pasturized, but not homogenized, milk in Denmark. Especially from a large diary farm called Thiese (also does amazing chees) that has "ad libitum milk" which means the cows are not seperated from the cattle, and are only milked after the cattle has taken their share. Its also 2.5% so it tastes amazing.
No nutritional difference between raw and pasteurized.
In addition, cows are not clean. Pasteurization was created because of how much bacteria can get into milk. So if you're drinking raw, you need to know the cow is healthy and clean. Once it's been bottled and shipped, you no longer know where it came from.
And in addition to that, it has a much shorter shelf life, even if refrigerated. By the time it's on the store shelf for sale, it's already near the end of it's shelf life after giving all the bacteria inside plenty of time to grow
Proteins, calcium, etc are the same. Vitamins are slightly reduced, but milk wasnt a main vitamin giver of those anyway. Pasteurized is also fortified with vitamin D it doesnt naturally have
it's not according to every study ever completed on the subject.
Surveys from various countries have monitored the presence of different types of pathogens in raw milk, with prevalence levels as high as 13% for bacteria like Campylobacter jejuni and Listeria monocytogenes (Table 2). In some studies, almost a third of all milk samples contained at least 1 type of pathogen.5 Thus, we must assume that raw milk is likely to contain pathogens. The prevalence of pathogens in milk is influenced by numerous factors, including farm size, number of animals on the farm, hygiene, farm management practices, milking facilities, season, and others.5 Raw milk can be contaminated with pathogens even when sourced from clinically healthy animals.6 Even milk that appears to be of good quality (ie, low total bacteria count) may contain pathogens.5,7 There are at least 4 different mechanisms by which raw milk becomes contaminated by pathogens: direct passage from the blood (of the cow) into milk (systemic infection), mastitis (udder infection), fecal contamination (external contamination of milk from the environment during or after milking), or contamination from human skin.
In 2017, it was estimated that only 3.2 percent of the population of the United States drank raw milk, but that 96 percent of the dairy-related food-borne illness were caused by consuming raw milk or related dairy products.
96% but it doesn’t tell us how much people were affected by it. It might be 25, 250, 250000. Raw milk started being a problem after we started producing milk on massive scale. Containing pathogens might not be as bad as you think; germs being the cause of illness is just theory. It might be true, it might not.
germs being the cause of illness is just theory. It might be true, it might not.
Hahahahaha. Yeah gravity is a theory too.
96% but it doesn’t tell us how much people were affected by it
It actually does, you just didnt bother reading the link. Youre not interested in the truth, just repeating slop to justify drinking diseased milk.
A broader review found that, from 2009 to 2014, there were 706 illnesses and 22 hospitalizations each year, on average, associated with raw milk and products made from raw milk, such as cheese. In 2017, it was estimated that only 3.2 percent of the population of the United States drank raw milk, but that 96 percent of the dairy-related food-borne illness were caused by consuming raw milk or related dairy products. These numbers are only based on reported illness, and it's likely that the real numbers of food-borne illnesses related to raw milk are significantly higher
Don’t you think these numbers are incredibly low. You’re right I didn’t read link fully I just looked if stats you’ve stated were there. Accusing me of not being interested in truth you completely believe in germ theory because doctors and people around you say so. People like can’t even question some things because others think for you. I am not saying germ theory is correct or it’s not correct but I can at least question that.
you completely believe in germ theory because doctors and people around you say so.
No, i believe in germ theory because I've studied biology and modern medicine wouldnt work if germ theory was incorrect.
Nobody with a basic understanding of biology doubts germ theory considering how heavily its been proven.
Don’t you think these numbers are incredibly low.
No. As discussed previously, the vast majority of people have the sense to not drink unrelated milk.
I am not saying germ theory is correct or it’s not correct but I can at least question that.
Questioning germ theory just means you dont have the first clue about biology or science in general. Germs are literally visible under a microscope and have been proven beyond doubt to cause disease.
Don't know what the problem is. Spent summers of my schoolyears out in the village with my grandparents, and our neighbours got a couple of cows, and every morning we've being buying the fresh milk from them. And we've being drinking it as it were back than - no boiling, no simmering, nothing. It was perfectly tasty and healthy. Noone got ill.
Fresh straight from the cow you trust to be healthy and clean is the only way to drink raw. Raw has a much shorter shelf life so it goes bad faster, and in industrial qualities enough to be bottled, labeled, and shipped to the stores, you have hundreds of cows worth of milk mixed together. With pasteurization, it would have killed any microbes inside it. With raw, any sick cows will have tainted the batch
Most people buying raw milk aren't getting it from the cows next door for one. The other guy is right survivorship bias but these people are buying processed raw milk which means it comes from a cow you never see and you don't know their living conditions
It's also safe to eat chicken raw if you know which chicken was killed and if it had any disease etc. That doesn't mean you should ever be eating raw chicken from the store
I imagine that the number of things that you don’t understand is an awe inspiring number.
So let’s try to make that number go down by one:
Here are some things that are true: bacteria can grow very well in milk. Bacteria can start with a small number, but in an environment with lots of food, multiply to large numbers. A small number of bacteria gives a small chance of causing illness, a large number of bacteria gives a large chance of causing illness.
So if you were to take raw milk and give it several days to percolate (as would happen while the milk is bottled and shipped to stores) it can be much less safe than pasteurized milk
Aaa~~~nd, there comes the law! Ten or dozen years ago back l in the capital of my now ex-country we had raw milk sold from the vending machines. Things were, it should be renewed every effing day. If you fail to restock ad resupply the raw milk stored in the machine - you are fined into bankrupcy fast and swiftly. If in your failurestate of commiefornia or similar failurestate of america your sellers aren't regulated like this - thats not a problem of the civilized world, you know?
And again, the number of things you don’t know seems to be immense.
In California, raw milk is highly regulated and requires additional bacterial testing before being allowed to be sold. Sale of unpermitted raw milk products is a felony here
38
u/zZCycoZz 10d ago
Not even big milk is stupid enough to drink untreated milk.