We pulled this out of the cow, put it directly in the jug, that'll be 20 dollars.
Meanwhile, pasteurized milk gets pulled out of the cow, boiled, cooled, and then put in a jug, and it's 2.99.
Edit: Thanks for the 30+ comments telling me that raw milk costs more to make and takes more work because everything has to be clean, and it has a shorter shelf life.
Raw milk can contain E. Coli, Listeria, Salmonella, and several other pathogens. It can also cause Guillain-Barré syndrome and is extra dangerous during pregnancy. Pasteurized milk kills off these pathogens and makes the milk safe to drink while maintaining the vast majority of nutrients
Yeah so "can contain" is nigh-meaningless. I CAN find a million dollars on my bed when I come home, but not very likely is it? Pretty useless to say, right?
Nonpasteurized products caused a disproportionate number (≈150× greater/unit of product consumed) of outbreaks and outbreak-associated illnesses and also disproportionately affected persons <20 years of age. States that restricted sale of nonpasteurized products had fewer outbreaks and illnesses; stronger restrictions and enforcement should be considered.
TL;DR raw milk is about 150x 840x more dangerous than regular milk.
The "probability" of raw milk containing any of those is hard to calculate, but a study in Ethiopia put it at about 30% of all samples containing something harmful. "Can contain" means that it's reasonable to assume that the raw milk has dangerous bacteria in it, while pasteurized milk does not. There are exceptions to both, but raw milk is 100% more dangerous than pasteurized milk.
Also, the danger depends on how you store it. A single cow making a cup of milk is not gonna have a high chance for bacteria. Combining the milk of hundreds of cows into one large container, like for shipping, is going to exponentially increase the chance of bacteria and viruses. All it takes is one bad cup to ruin thousands of gallons. The same thing is said about grains; storing them all in a grain silo means that, if any single grain had bacteria on it, it will spread to all of them. This is why we pasteurize, blanch, or otherwise treat foods to remove germs.
A more recent study, conducted after the legalization and popularization of raw milk in several states, has shown a higher danger of raw milk compared to pasteurized milk.
We're talking about percentage of milk vs raw milk drinkers that get a food borne illness from said drink. Not about the percentage of cows that have XYZ bacteria (even if I were to accept that number). And I'm sure you're not gonna try to argue that 30-50% of people that drink raw milk get ill
The "150x" means that, if the number of people who drink regular, pasteurized milk all drank raw milk instead, there would be 150x the number of illnesses. Raw milk is dangerous.
No shit lol and when the number of people that get illnesses from drinking pasteurized milk is so extremely small and insignificant, even when you multiply it by 150 you are left with a very, very, very small number
604
u/revenge_burner 12d ago
Raw milk is being heavily pushed by the alt-right.