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.
Look, Cornell University (yes, I cite them a lot) states in their official position statement regarding raw milk and advocating pastuerization that the biggest improvement in safety of milk came from understanding the disease risks, educating producers and consumers about those risks, and instating proper sanitation and hygiene practices. In the list of the 4 changes responsible for improvement milk safety since the 1900's, pasteurization is last. The largest improvements were recorded when proper hygiene and sanitation were observed. This defeats the argument that ONLY pasteurization makes milk safe for consumption.
By the laws of system dynamics, the more complex a system is the more points of failure are introduced into that system. With each increase in the number of failure points within a system, the risks of failure increases exponentially.
While complex systems can offer us redundancies during these failures in truly industrial systems, agricultural is not a truly industrial system no matter how much we humans try and force Nature to comply.
Because our food system has become so complex and distributed, an incident that once would only affect a limited area or a limited sector of the market can now affect a global area and unlimited sectors of the market.
Food safety is a myth because nothing you consume can ever be 100% safe. Something have greater or lesser risk, but safety is an illusion. The illusion of safety helps us cope with the fact that life is a fatal condition... no one gets out alive! Additionally, food safety within the context of this debate (about government regulation) is a myth because people still get sick and die from food-bourne illnesses every year despite our supposedly "safe" food system... and new diseases have been created or have been reported in species that have never been affected in the past. The problems that many of these regulations are attempting to resolve are problems the system itself has created or exacerbated.
^ Very well thought out, insightful, intelligent posts.
And non-hysterical, too, I might add.
Thank you for bringing in the reasoned voice of logic into what has been so hotly, and vociferously, denied.
Good idea, I fear that I am not that highly evolved....yet.
It takes A LOT of practice. I admit that being married to someone who enjoys debating for the simple sake of debating has helped me learn how to remain calmer Not starting with the assumption that you are absolutely right, or having the desire "to win at all costs" helps too... but that takes even more practice
I admit there are days when I find it difficult not to flame out and tell someone that they are a bleeping idiot with less intelligence and common sense than a hibernating hamster. Those are the days I close the laptop and go do yardwork to work off some frustration.
Food safety--------are the confirmed cases of children getting sick by contracting e-coli coming from drinking raw milk or pasteurized milk ?
Since the vast majority of kids drink pasteurized milk, isn't it strang the cases of confirmed e-coli have come from the small minority of kids drinking raw milk ?
This has been a great conversation, thanks to everyone taking the time to explain the details- as a city-dweller this "raw milk" concept was completely foreign to me. I have visited dairy farms before, but I don't recall this coming up.
I try and purchase Organic Valley Coop milk, they got great rankings here:
Food safety--------are the confirmed cases of children getting sick by contracting e-coli coming from drinking raw milk or pasteurized milk ?
Since the vast majority of kids drink pasteurized milk, isn't it strang the cases of confirmed e-coli have come from the small minority of kids drinking raw milk ?
Post some links corroborating your claims, or zip it.
Natural food is getting harder and harder to get.
I can understand having inspections to determine if the property and products are clean and free from toxins, but really must they do this sort of thing?
Why exactly can we not buy unpasturized milk if we chooze to.
It is still OK for commercial growers to souse their fields with tons of pesticides and fungacides, much of which remains in and on the produce and CANNOT be washed off. They can inject hormones in to cattle and feed it to the chickens and that's OK too. Yet these farmers who want to raise a Natural product are harrassed constantly.
Why?
And really why do they take computers?
What exactly do they look for there?
And having done this and examined them why do they not give them back?
Why should I provide links ?
The OP has a link that you didn't even bother reading ( and about which this threasd is based)
If you won't take the time to read a link in the OP, why should I bother posting links?
9th paragraph of the OP's link.
Read it before you ask for more links that you refuse to read .
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.
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.
