U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Food and Drink
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-01-2014, 10:16 PM
 
2,930 posts, read 3,699,990 times
Reputation: 1414

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by freepelican View Post
Just a quick reply for now... when you have a diverse community of friendly (most Lactobacillus but others too) bacteria and living enzymes, these keep the pathogens from getting out of hand. However, if you have pasteurized milk where these have all been killed, the pathogens have free reign... this is sort of over-simplified but basically true.
Enzymes are not living. They can be active or inactive. They are proteins that catalyze certain reactions and they also require other substances to do it. In order for an enzyme to work it must have all the co-enzyme and co-factors as well as be at the right temperature and PH. There are also chemicals and substances that can interfere with enzyme function. The friendly bacteria may be in completion with the pathogens, but there is no reason why the pathogens can’t reach a level that is dangerous.

Milk when it comes out of a healthy cow is actually sterile. It picks up the bacteria in the handling and thus can pick up both friendly and unfriendly bacteria (pathogens). They could come from a sick cow, the skin of
the utter, the hands of the person milking the cow, the container the milk is put into and so on.

In short if you are drinking unpasteurized milk you are betting that old Gertrude the cow was not ill that day, her utters didn’t get dirty and where properly cleaned before milking, the person and the equipment milking the cow are all pathogen free and so on. If at any step there were pathogens, there is no defense.

Pathogens don’t necessarily make the milk taste bad, but bad tasting milk is an sign that there are high bacteria levels in the milk. An good example would be T.B. before the advent of pasteurized milk, raw milk was an common source of infection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycobacterium_bovis

Modern farming requires that the cow be tested for it. Here is an list of diseases transmitted by raw milk.

http://labspace.open.ac.uk/mod/oucon...&section=1.6.2

Pasteurization basically kills many bacteria and damages the survivors making it much harder for any pathogen that maybe in the milk to make you ill. However there are pathogens that could survive pasteurization. Pasteurization isn't quite sterilization.

This is why unless the milk was ultra pasteurized(like the cream you get in the small container on the table for coffee in a restaurant) it will spoil if unopened and will spoil if not refrigerated. One of my jobs long ago was making sure that the bacteria levels in incoming raw milk were not too high to begin with.

The milk industry actually fought pasteurization. At the time few people had refrigeration and thus couldn't benefit from the longer shelf life of pasteurized milk but pasteurized milk was safer for the public.

Last edited by chirack; 05-01-2014 at 10:57 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-01-2014, 11:49 PM
 
642 posts, read 912,928 times
Reputation: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
Enzymes are not living. They can be active or inactive. They are proteins that catalyze certain reactions and they also require other substances to do it. In order for an enzyme to work it must have all the co-enzyme and co-factors as well as be at the right temperature and PH. There are also chemicals and substances that can interfere with enzyme function. The friendly bacteria may be in completion with the pathogens, but there is no reason why the pathogens canít reach a level that is dangerous.

Milk when it comes out of a healthy cow is actually sterile. It picks up the bacteria in the handling and thus can pick up both friendly and unfriendly bacteria (pathogens). They could come from a sick cow, the skin of
the utter, the hands of the person milking the cow, the container the milk is put into and so on.

In short if you are drinking unpasteurized milk you are betting that old Gertrude the cow was not ill that day, her utters didnít get dirty and where properly cleaned before milking, the person and the equipment milking the cow are all pathogen free and so on. If at any step there were pathogens, there is no defense.

Pathogens donít necessarily make the milk taste bad, but bad tasting milk is an sign that there are high bacteria levels in the milk. An good example would be T.B. before the advent of pasteurized milk, raw milk was an common source of infection:

Mycobacterium bovis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern farming requires that the cow be tested for it. Here is an list of diseases transmitted by raw milk.

http://labspace.open.ac.uk/mod/oucon...&section=1.6.2

Pasteurization basically kills many bacteria and damages the survivors making it much harder for any pathogen that maybe in the milk to make you ill. However there are pathogens that could survive pasteurization. Pasteurization isn't quite sterilization.

This is why unless the milk was ultra pasteurized(like the cream you get in the small container on the table for coffee in a restaurant) it will spoil if unopened and will spoil if not refrigerated. One of my jobs long ago was making sure that the bacteria levels in incoming raw milk were not too high to begin with.

The milk industry actually fought pasteurization. At the time few people had refrigeration and thus couldn't benefit from the longer shelf life of pasteurized milk but pasteurized milk was safer for the public.
I suggest you read the book, "The Untold Story of Milk." Here is the link to it at Amazon:

The Untold Story of Milk, Revised and Updated: The History, Politics and Science of Nature's Perfect Food: Raw Milk from Pasture-Fed Cows: Ron Schmid: 9780979209529: Amazon.com: Books

This book clears up many misconceptions people have about raw milk, pasteurization, and the history of pasteurization.

The reasons pasteurization of milk came about were profit driven, not health driven.

Illnesses due to milk have almost all come from tainted pasteurized milk, not raw milk..... thousands of individuals have been affected... some have died.

Pathogens are in the air but it is their unchecked proliferation that is usually the problem. Drop a few into pasteurized milk and they'll have a heyday but not so in raw milk because there are so many "good" bacteria and living enzymes to keep them under control. The same is true in our guts. The healthiest person has some "bad" bacteria in their gut but they are usually kept in check by the good guys.

"Living enzymes" is the vernacular that is used in almost every source you'll read, including some academic papers. It just means that the enzymes have not been destroyed (proteins denatured) by the extreme heat of pasteurization, i.e. they are still enzymatically active/bioactive. They can aid in digestion and aid in in the metabolism of milk as it naturally ferments (clabbers).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2014, 12:51 AM
 
2,930 posts, read 3,699,990 times
Reputation: 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by freepelican View Post
I suggest you read the book, "The Untold Story of Milk." Here is the link to it at Amazon:

The Untold Story of Milk, Revised and Updated: The History, Politics and Science of Nature's Perfect Food: Raw Milk from Pasture-Fed Cows: Ron Schmid: 9780979209529: Amazon.com: Books

This book clears up many misconceptions people have about raw milk, pasteurization, and the history of pasteurization.

The reasons pasteurization of milk came about were profit driven, not health driven.

Illnesses due to milk have almost all come from tainted pasteurized milk, not raw milk..... thousands of individuals have been affected... some have died.

Pathogens are in the air but it is their unchecked proliferation that is usually the problem. Drop a few into pasteurized milk and they'll have a heyday but not so in raw milk because there are so many "good" bacteria and living enzymes to keep them under control. The same is true in our guts. The healthiest person has some "bad" bacteria in their gut but they are usually kept in check by the good guys.

"Living enzymes" is the vernacular that is used in almost every source you'll read, including some academic papers. It just means that the enzymes have not been destroyed (proteins denatured) by the extreme heat of pasteurization, i.e. they are still enzymatically active/bioactive. They can aid in digestion and aid in in the metabolism of milk as it naturally ferments (clabbers).
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/pdfs/11-1370.pdf

Check page 386. 60% of the outbreaks linked to dairy products(milk, cheese, ect.) from 1993-2006 were from unpasteurized milk. In the 56 cases with fluid milk it was 82%! In addition the people who got sick from unpasteurized milk tended to be younger and tended to be more likely to need hospitalizations than those from pasteurized milk. The only case where unpasteurized was "safer" was for cheese and even then the number of deaths and hospitalization where smaller for pasteurized cheese.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2014, 01:16 PM
 
642 posts, read 912,928 times
Reputation: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack View Post
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/3/pdfs/11-1370.pdf

Check page 386. 60% of the outbreaks linked to dairy products(milk, cheese, ect.) from 1993-2006 were from unpasteurized milk. In the 56 cases with fluid milk it was 82%! In addition the people who got sick from unpasteurized milk tended to be younger and tended to be more likely to need hospitalizations than those from pasteurized milk. The only case where unpasteurized was "safer" was for cheese and even then the number of deaths and hospitalization where smaller for pasteurized cheese.
This study has been shown to be flawed in numerous ways and the CDC/FDA has a history of gunning for raw milk... the reasons for which basically boils down to being an arm of Big Ag. If you want to understand why, follow the money.

Here's a few articles you can read but the book I suggested would be better:

CDC Cherry Picks Data to Make Case Against Raw Milk - Weston A Price Foundation

FDA and CDC Bias Against Raw Milk - Weston A Price Foundation

This gives a few examples of where raw milk has been implicated by the FDA when the evidence did not support this, in fact supported the opposite:

FDA and CDC Bias Against Raw Milk | A Campaign for Real MilkA Campaign for Real Milk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Food and Drink
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top