FREE Subscription
The World’s Most Popular Natural Health Newsletter   
 
 
POSTED BY
August 10 2007
The Raw Milk Debate Reaches the New York Times and the Washington Post

The demand for raw, unpasteurized milk is booming. According to Sally Fallon, president for the Weston A. Price Foundation, the number of raw milk drinkers is now at about half a million people across the United States -- many of them willingly breaking the law, purchasing their milk from “underground black markets,” and other creative setups.

Twenty years ago, the Food and Drug Administration banned interstate sales of unpasteurized milk, but individual states determine how raw milk is allowed to be bought and sold within their borders. The sale of raw milk for human consumption is illegal in 15 states, whereas 26 allow it with restrictions. Only a handful of states, including Washington and California, allow it to be sold in stores.

Gregory Miller, vice president of the National Dairy Council, claims drinking raw milk is like playing Russian roulette, asking, “Why would you take that risk?”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture tested raw milk from 861 farms in 21 states in July 2007. Their report came back claiming nearly a quarter of the samples contained illness-causing bacteria, including five percent with listeria, three percent with salmonella, and four percent with less dangerous types of E. coli.

Raw-milk proponents claim it contains more nutritional value, and more antibodies and healthful enzymes than pasteurized milk. “What proponents of raw milk call ‘life forces,’ we call bacteria,” says Ted Elkin, deputy director of Maryland’s Office of Food Protection and Consumer Health Services.

But Sally Fallon points out that tainted dairy is only a problem when the milk comes from typical conventional dairy facilities. “That milk could pose a danger,” she says, “But milk from cows fed on pastures actually has [it's] own antimicrobial components that keep it safe.”

New York Times August 8, 2007

Washington Post August 7, 2007



Dr. MercolaDr. Mercola's Comments:

It’s both grimly sad and a bit humorous, if you’re on the satirical side, that “health protection agencies” are so quick to want to ban and limit foods that carry fairly minor health risks -- but lots of health benefits -- while leaving toxic, synthetic food additives and all sorts of junk foods by, claiming those chemical substances carry no health risk…  

You couldn’t possibly convince me that eating fast food every day carries less of a health risk than drinking raw milk. I think they’re simply counting on your ignorance. 

Fortunately, you have access to a massive amount of information on this site, which is designed to give you the tools to create better health for yourself, instead of letting Big Business or government agencies make these decisions for you. 

If you’ve read this newsletter for a while, you know I am a strong advocate for raw milk. In my opinion, pasteurized milk is just simply not designed for your best long-term health interests and will invariably cause you problems if you drink it long enough.  

Could Your Health Benefit From Raw Milk? 

Many of my patients have gotten enormous benefit from raw milk, and I strongly recommend you consider it for a number of reasons: 

  • Raw milk still contains all of the valuable enzymes that are destroyed during pasteurization. Without them, milk is very difficult to digest. So if you have a lactose intolerance, it sill simply disappear once you start consuming raw dairy products.

  • Raw milk is an outstanding source of healthy, “good” bacteria and micronutrients, including lactobacillus, acidophilus, and vitamins, which are virtually eliminated by the pasteurization process of commercial milk. It is an outstanding nutrient to promote the growth of healthy bacteria in your intestine.

  • Raw milk still contains natural butterfat, which is homogenized or removed in commercial milk. Without butterfat, the body cannot absorb and utilize the vitamins and minerals in the water fraction of the milk. Butterfat is also the best source of preformed vitamin A, and contains re-arranged acids with strong anti-carcinogenic properties.

  • Raw milk does not contain synthetic vitamin D, which is known to be toxic to the liver, yet is still added to most commercial milk.

  • Raw milk contains healthy cholesterol.  

Pasteurizing milk destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamins, denatures fragile milk proteins, destroys vitamin B12 and vitamin B6, kills beneficial bacteria, and promotes pathogens.

From my perspective, there’s simply no rational justification to ever drink pasteurized milk, even organic pasteurized milk.  

Once you heat milk, you distort the configuration -- the shape -- of the fragile milk protein (see illustration on left), turning it from something good into something bad that will actually cause allergies and other autoimmune dysfunction. So, even if you start with organic milk from grass-fed cows, once you heat it the milk is ruined and should not be consumed.

In addition to the reasons mentioned above, raw-milk drinkers also rave about these additional benefits:

  • You feel the health benefits: Raw milk is not associated with any of the health problems surrounding pasteurized milk, such as rheumatoid arthritis, skin rashes, diarrhea, and cramps. Even people who have been allergic to pasteurized milk for many years can typically tolerate and even thrive on raw milk.

  • It tastes better: As with any food, fresher is always better and this applies to milk as well. Fresh raw milk is creamier and better tasting than pasteurized milk that has a shelf life of several weeks.

Are You Playing Russian Roulette if You Drink Raw Milk?

Dirty milk, of course, does carry its health risks. But Certified Grade A milk, produced under government supervision and guaranteed absolutely clean, is available practically all over the country and is the dairy farmer's answer to the pasteurization zealots.

You can also ask to see your farmer’s bacteria count of the dairy for that week. Most will be happy you asked and proud to show you the quality of their dairy. As Sally Fallon notes, grass-fed cows, rather than those stuck in pens eating corn, are your healthiest, pathogen-free sources for raw milk.

Remember this though: just as with all other food recommendations, raw milk may not necessarily be a wonder food for everyone.

Listen to your body when you consume dairy -- if it doesn’t agree with you, don’t drink it. Simple as that. Your body will always give you the feedback you need to make the most optimal, health-promoting choices for you.

Where to Buy Raw Milk

Fortunately, no matter how far public health officials will go to discredit the benefits of raw milk, a growing number of Americans are choosing natural dairy sources, even though they may be breaking the law in some states.

If you're unable to find a local source for raw milk, visit the Real Milk site to find a provider close to you. You can also review this link for raw milk availability and restrictions by state. The Weston Price Foundation is an amazing resource to help you locate and secure raw milk. I’m on their advisory board and would encourage you to consider joining their organization.  One of the most practical options is forming a "cow share' program where you actually pay the farmer to own a part of his cow and then pay him to milk the cow for you as it is legal for anyone who owns a cow to drink raw milk. The only challenge is selling it, unless of course you live in California, where selling raw milk is perfectly legal.

Despite opponents’ smear campaigns, designed to scare you away from one of the healthiest foods out there, I’m still encouraged, because this is a great example of how public demand forces changes for the better.   

Consumers voting with their dollars do have incredible power, so keep pressing for positive change, using your wallet!


Related Articles:

Did you find this article interesting?  Interesting Not Useful
Community Comments ( 67 )
Comment on this Article
  
  
bigboy29
[ Joined on 05/07 ] [ Posted on August 10, 2007 ]
20 Points        
   
 
Apprentice User
Hmmm...

Rather than the current BS campaign against raw milk, they'd better do the same kind of research against stuff that is sold at McDolands.

How many health problems is that stuff responsible for on a daily basis ?

"Concerned about public health"... yeah whatever...
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
neroli moonstone
[ Joined on 06/07 ]  [ Posted on August 11, 2007]
15 Points        
   
Apprentice User
  Mercola
Thats right , why continuely target a natural food whilst all the rubbish and poisons are left alone. Love Dom ox
Mercola
  
Amanda Rose
[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on August 31, 2007]
6 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola

For some raw milk politics entertainment, see the billboard that was tagged in central California just before Christmas:

www.rebuild-from-depression.com/.../milk_is_milk_billboard_tagged.html

  
  
still.learning
[ Joined on 06/06 ] [ Posted on August 10, 2007 ]
17 Points        
   
 
This user is BELOW novice level and all their comments need to be reviewed with great caution.
Comment does not pertain to the topic of the article or does not provide value or insight to the discussion.
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Patty D
[ Joined on 06/07 ]  [ Posted on August 10, 2007]
11 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
One reason I began purchasing and drinking raw milk was that my research said the enzymes which allow calcium in milk to be used by the body are destroyed with pasteurization.  (I have osteoporosis).I make kefir with my milk as I am extremely lactose intolerant.  Even if there is a tiny risk of infections from raw milk, the kefir will prevent it.  I don't believe the risks quoted in the articles are real though, not if the milk is from a small, grass fed dairy.  Real, non FDA or otherwise government funded studies show that there are FEWER pathogenic organisms in raw milk than in pasteurized as pasteurizing kills the good organisms, but the hardy disease causing ones can survive.  So, instead of raw milk, what does the industry do?  Introduce ULTRAPASTEURIZATION.  Go figure.
Mercola
  
BiomedE
[ Joined on 11/06 ]  [ Posted on August 12, 2007]
1 Points        
   
Apprentice User
  Mercola
I'm not sure such criticism of the phrasing is wholly founded: you have to remember his perceived audience.  I can understand why a scientist may shy away from using technical terms ('denature') when speaking for a lay audience.  IMHO, 'kill' is at least a moderately acceptable analogous term.

That said, I'm all for accuracy in reporting so I don't mean to say that you were completely off-base with the criticism either.

Health and Cheers!
Mercola
  
Mark Fletcher
[ Joined on 04/07 ]  [ Posted on August 31, 2007]
-1 Points        
   
Novice User
  Mercola

Patty D, the bacteria in kefir will destroy some types of pathogenic bacteria, but not all of them.  You still need to get your raw milk from a farm that you trust.

  
  
MZ1227
[ Joined on 11/06 ] [ Posted on August 11, 2007 ]
10 Points        
   
 
Savvy User
I'm from California and I started drinking Organic Pastures Milk to help with my lactose intolerance, but I had no idea it would also help with my SEVERE seasonal allergies. God bless the McAfee family and all others who care more about HUMANITY than about $$$.
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Health Freedom
[ Joined on 11/06 ]  [ Posted on August 11, 2007]
10 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
Many have found raw milk to be helpful for allergies and asthma.

As far as the McAfee's go, fortunately there is no inherent contradiction between serving humanity and making money.  Given sufficient freedom, people can make a profit doing things that are good for their fellow man.  Sounds like a win-win scenario to me.
  
  
mmc88121
[ Joined on 11/06 ] [ Posted on August 9, 2007 ]
9 Points        
   
 
Moderator User
Still somewhat slanted towards the conventional wisdom but better than most. So in 7 years there were 45 illnesses tied to raw milk, that is less than 7 per year and only 2 deaths in those 7 years.  I think that is a very good record.  Especially when you compare it to the pharmaceutical industry.

Mary
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Katee Roux
[ Joined on 07/07 ]  [ Posted on August 10, 2007]
9 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
But the focus, in main-stream media, will always be on the most sensational they can find.  Since drinking raw milk is not the NORM, any abnormality or illness will be focused on.  Has the main-stream media commented on the fact that health care is the 3rd leading cause of death in this country?  I honestly don't know as i don't watch the news, but i doubt it.  But hey, let's focus on these 2 deaths.  

I occasionally read the Quackwatch page, as i'm curious about what lies Stephen Barrett is spreading.  He goes to much trouble to quote one death by chiropractic.  Even if it is true (& i don't know it is) he's totally overlooking the number of deaths caused by his beloved allopathic medicine.

Makes me thing of Jesus telling the folks with a log in their eye to take care of themselves before worring about a spec in the other guy's eye.
Mercola
  
Health Freedom
[ Joined on 11/06 ]  [ Posted on August 10, 2007]
4 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola

Mary, I wouldn't take these statistics on face value.  Government agencies go out of their way to blame raw milk for illnesses they didn't cause and then the media just parrots them.

Here is an excerpt from a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation.  I would suggest reading the whole thing, which I have linked to at the end.

"Reports of individuals becoming ill after drinking raw milk do exist, although none were cited in the recent CDC and FDA Reminder. But even these reports do not usually provide proof that raw milk caused illness. When someone who drinks raw milk becomes ill, these agencies immediately report an 'association' with raw milk, ignoring other vectors of disease and subsequent tests showing the milk to be clean," reports Fallon. "FDA and CDC definitely have a double standard when it comes to raw milk."

Fallon cites the example of a May 1983 outbreak of illness from Campylobacter in Pennsylvania, reported to be "associated" with raw milk in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Yet the report admits that cultures of the raw milk from the farm did not yield Campylobacter ; members of the farm family routinely drank raw milk and none reported illness.

A more recent example is the March 2, 2007, recall and warning against "Tainted Raw Milk Sold by a York County Dairy," also in Pennsylvania. Stump Acres Dairy was "linked" to two cases in a Salmonella outbreak. Although none of the dairy's remaining 250 customers showed signs of illness, Stump Acres Dairy was ordered to suspend sales. Cultures subsequently taken from the dairy and the milk tested negative for Salmonella and the dairy has reopened.

http://www.westonaprice.org/press/press-12mar07-fda-cdc-raw-milk-reminder.html

  
  
stoic
[ Joined on 03/07 ] [ Posted on August 10, 2007 ]
8 Points        
   
 
Apprentice User
Until "whose business is it?" is debated, and won (nobody's), there will be no shortage of superfluous make-work. What kind of milk you drink is just one of an infinite number of inane distractions. Someone else posted Thoreau's observation already, " There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." Until people learn to mind their own business, and insist others do the same, the plague of symptoms will continue. 
 [ Reply ]
  
  
shiva
[ Joined on 10/06 ] [ Posted on August 9, 2007 ]
8 Points        
   
 
Savvy User
This is such a great example of how more and more people are returning to the wisdom of "natural" diet and natural living.  .... I really believe that in the long run it is those among us who have returned to natural living who will survive and thrive into the future.

Industry may attempt to stop the availability of such real foods as raw milk,... but they will never be able to prevent folks from owning their own cow or goat or growing their own food as The Creator intended.
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Russ Bianchi
[ Joined on 09/06 ]  [ Posted on August 9, 2007]
10 Points