Has anyone here actually gotten sick from raw milk?

[BBG580]

I haven't known anyone to get sick from it. My dad swore by raw milk. However I have a germ thing and while i would like raw milk- I opt to get milk from a local dairy that low heat pasteurized and not homogenized. It's so good it is addictive.

 

Yep, this is what we bought and drank when we lived in the Midwest but it is just impossible to find in our current area. I simply low heat pasteurize milk myself at home now (though I do sometimes drink it raw b/c the taste really is insanely good!) and have that same great non-homogenized milk with great flavor that I am not worried about my children drinking.

 

I don't think I have ever believed in "milk magic" or anything like that, I just think raw milk tastes delicious and is so much different than what you get at the store that is ultra-pasteurized. It is like two entirely different beverages flavor-wise. Even my husband was surprised at how much better fresh, non-homogenized milk tastes.

[LarlaB]

Growing up we (literally) walked to get our raw milk from an Amish neighbor-straight from the tank. I got sick once- salmonella- and it was traced to the milk- I was very sick, but obviously recovered. :) And wow- I drank a LOT of milk. ;)

[BeckyFL]

I'm actually genuinely curious about this.

 

(My background is in protein chemistry, specifically in protein stability, and as such I have extensive experience of how proteins behave under various conditions. I also have some experience in microbiology, lipid, and carbohydrate chemistry. So that's where I'm coming from.)

 

It seems to me that any "magic" due to the action of proteins (enzymatic, immunological, etc) will be destroyed by the acidity in the stomach--milk curdles (the proteins denature, rendering them inactive) in acid, which is why it is inadvisable to put both lemon and milk in one's tea:). And besides that, bovine proteins may or may not be functional in humans; bovine antibodies most certainly won't. As for any sort of "living" element--milk is supposed to be sterile in the cow, and introducing bacteria from the outside of the cow or from the barnyard is actively avoided at a raw milk dairy. So that leaves us with the smaller components--vitamins and minerals, which I suppose may be more available in unpasteurized milk, as well as fats and carbohydrates, but fats and carbohydrates are far less affected by changes in temperature.

 

Since what seems right to me is not always what is correct in reality, I'd be interested in whatever people have to say about these particular issues and also in any scientific studies on this topic.

 

Here is a site with a break down of benefits. It would be great to have your take on it!

http://www.raw-milk-facts.com/raw_milk_health_benefits.html

[melissel]

I'm actually genuinely curious about this.

 

(My background is in protein chemistry, specifically in protein stability, and as such I have extensive experience of how proteins behave under various conditions. I also have some experience in microbiology, lipid, and carbohydrate chemistry. So that's where I'm coming from.)

 

It seems to me that any "magic" due to the action of proteins (enzymatic, immunological, etc) will be destroyed by the acidity in the stomach--milk curdles (the proteins denature, rendering them inactive) in acid, which is why it is inadvisable to put both lemon and milk in one's tea:). And besides that, bovine proteins may or may not be functional in humans; bovine antibodies most certainly won't. As for any sort of "living" element--milk is supposed to be sterile in the cow, and introducing bacteria from the outside of the cow or from the barnyard is actively avoided at a raw milk dairy. So that leaves us with the smaller components--vitamins and minerals, which I suppose may be more available in unpasteurized milk, as well as fats and carbohydrates, but fats and carbohydrates are far less affected by changes in temperature.

 

Since what seems right to me is not always what is correct in reality, I'd be interested in whatever people have to say about these particular issues and also in any scientific studies on this topic.

 

You know, I think it all comes down to who you believe. There are plenty of people who believe that humans shouldn't have anything to do with milk products after they're weaned, for lots of reasons, probably some of which you just detailed above.

 

Then there are others who claim to have science that refutes those claims, proves the value of raw milk for everyone, and proves that homogenized, ultra-pasteurized will kill you.

 

Then there are those who claim to have science that homogenized, ultra-pasteurized milk is good for everyone and we should all drink plenty of it every day, and that raw milk drinkers will surely wind up with salmonella, e coli, brucellosis, etc.

 

You really just have to decide what you believe the most! Personally, I fall into the camp that believes that humans don't need milk past weaning age, but that find life without cheese simply isn't worth living and cereal without milk is just a waste of calories :D I'd prefer if my dairy were unpasteurized, but since my body disagrees, I'll take my cheddar as natural as I can get it otherwise!

[BeckyFL]

I think that's true... it does come down to what you believe. It's just hard to know WHAT to believe. We picked up our first 2 gallons today. The farmer delivers to a house about 5 min from us. We talked to the lady at the house who accepts the deliveries and she was saying that they have been doing this for a couple of years. She has seen a big improvement in the health of her family. She's a personal trainer part-time at a country club and there is a doctor who comes there. He asked her how she stays so healthy and she told him about the raw milk. She says that now every time he sees her, he brings her literature and begs her not to give it to her family... that it could kill them. She says the sad thing is that the Dr. has heart disease and many other problems himself. So who do you believe?

 

Ds loved the milk btw.

[happypamama]

I do think it comes down to who you believe, and why. However, my personal belief is that many, many people drank raw milk for years and years, and many of them did just fine. Wide-spread pasteurization is not that old. Whether or not you think humans need milk past weaning age is a different question, but if you think milk is a reasonable part of a balanced diet, then to me, it makes the most sense to drink milk that is as close to its natural state as possible.

[melissel]

I think that's true... it does come down to what you believe. It's just hard to know WHAT to believe. We picked up our first 2 gallons today. The farmer delivers to a house about 5 min from us. We talked to the lady at the house who accepts the deliveries and she was saying that they have been doing this for a couple of years. She has seen a big improvement in the health of her family. She's a personal trainer part-time at a country club and there is a doctor who comes there. He asked her how she stays so healthy and she told him about the raw milk. She says that now every time he sees her, he brings her literature and begs her not to give it to her family... that it could kill them. She says the sad thing is that the Dr. has heart disease and many other problems himself. So who do you believe?

 

Ds loved the milk btw.

 

It COULD kill them. So could eating at any restaurant on the planet. So could visiting foreign countries. So could flying in an airplane, riding in a car, and eating factory-farmed meat. You have to decide on your own risk tolerance, and on whose research sounds most reasonable and rings most true to you.

 

I kind of think of it like the creation versus evolution debate :lol: Obviously there are lots of scientists who have "proof" that humans evolved, and there are lots of scientists who also claim to have "proof" that disputes the other scientists' "proof," and they say they have "proof" of their own that supports creation science. How will anyone ever know whose "proof" is really truth? We won't. We can only decide what we believe and what rings true to us, in spite of everyone's "proof." In many ways it's a leap of faith. You will probably never know who is RIGHT about either of these issues!

 

I'll say this. In the two years we drank raw milk, I never noticed any difference in our overall health as a family (with the exception of my gastro issues with the milk). I haven't noticed any improvement or decline since we stopped. I still think raw milk is better for people who want to consume dairy products, because I think food should be consumed as close as possible to the state in which nature provides it. That would be my priority. Someone else's priority might be eliminating every possible risk of contracting some kind of virus or bacteria. What's your priority, and is it high enough for you to ignore potential risks?

 

But then, I use a disgusting sponge rather than a dishrag to wash my dishes and clean my kitchen, so you may have to take my advice with a grain of salt :lol:

[BBG580]

I think that's true... it does come down to what you believe. It's just hard to know WHAT to believe. We picked up our first 2 gallons today. The farmer delivers to a house about 5 min from us. We talked to the lady at the house who accepts the deliveries and she was saying that they have been doing this for a couple of years. She has seen a big improvement in the health of her family. She's a personal trainer part-time at a country club and there is a doctor who comes there. He asked her how she stays so healthy and she told him about the raw milk. She says that now every time he sees her, he brings her literature and begs her not to give it to her family... that it could kill them. She says the sad thing is that the Dr. has heart disease and many other problems himself. So who do you believe?

 

Ds loved the milk btw.

 

I think isolated situations should be considered anecdotal. Maybe there are other factors that keep that family so healthy that have nothing to do with the milk. Maybe the doctor has hereditary heart disease. It isn't like raw milk is a magic bullet drug that will cure the human race's health issues!

 

Listen, I buy and drink raw milk I just try and be realistic about the benefits vs. risks. I do think it tastes better and I do think in general things that are less processed are better for you. However, there are benefits to pasteurizing and to ignore those benefits seems a little silly. (I do pasteurize the milk my kids drink.)

[BeckyFL]

I think isolated situations should be considered anecdotal. Maybe there are other factors that keep that family so healthy that have nothing to do with the milk. Maybe the doctor has hereditary heart disease. It isn't like raw milk is a magic bullet drug that will cure the human race's health issues!

 

:iagree: But I should add that she was talking about asthma for one thing and that is documented in a European study.

Edited February 16, 2011 by BeckyFL

[BBG580]

:iagree: But I should add that she was talking about asthma for one thing and that is documented in a European study.

 

I'm glad you agree. :)

 

I just wanted to point out that I think it is sort of crazy to attribute glowing health with raw milk and disease as a result of a diet without raw milk. I love raw milk, it tastes wonderful but I sort of view it as I do alcohol, most of the time consumption is fine but it could be dangerous. I know the risks and I drink it anyway and I really like the family who provides us our milk.

 

I do think it funny that states regulate the sale of raw milk because it is "dangerous" yet so many states happily use tax payer money for methadone clinics. I'm not saying that methadone as a way to treat heroine addiction isn't helpful, but COME ON! It is just crazy some of the stuff the FDA and state governments decide is a "health risk" and other things that are tax payer supported. To believe that lobbyists aren't at the bottom of it all is a little nuts too. A lot of things that aren't good for human use are easily bought (ie. guns and cigarettes immediately spring to mind) but Oh! - raw milk is dangerous. It is funny when you think about it and it is all really politically motivated.

[kalanamak]

But I should add that she was talking about asthma for one thing and that is documented in a European study.

 

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/404/enemy-camp-2010

 

The second chapter of this radio program is all about a very convincing man who says asthma is related to modern humans not having enough intestinal parasites. :D