The last week or so has been a terrible time for Edwin Shank and his family, along with twenty or more of his raw milk customers.
The suspicions that his dairy’s milk was behind an outbreak of campylobacter were confirmed when the Maryland Department of Health reported yesterday that it isolated campylobacter in two unopened jugs of the Pennsylvania dairy’s raw milk retrieved from a customer’s refrigerator.
“So now the wondering, suspense and uncertainty is over for our family and farm crew and is replaced by humiliation and embarrassment,” Shank wrote in a letter to customers and friends of The Family Cow. “Dawn and I have shed a lot of tears over this. Now we know for sure what the growing list of emails and calls from you were pointing to. It was us. We are very sorry.”
To his credit, Shank has handled the entire crisis of the last week in an upfront, transparent way. He cooperated fully with public health authorities and did extensive private testing in an effort to get to the bottom of the reports of illness among his customers. Campylobacter isn’t easy to isolate in milk, it turns out.
Even today, he invited those sickened by his dairy’s milk to call in. “We would love to communicate with you personally. We really do care. You won’t be the first customer we have cried with this week. My personal email is: edwin@thefamilycow.com. If you can, please leave your phone number too. Sometimes I get so tired of emailing that I would rather just talk.”
He gave some indications as to the personal pain his Mennonite family has been feeling. “Our whole family and farm team is praying fervently for your speedy recovery. Even Jefferson, who is 5, prays at every chance he gets that God would make all the sick people better again.
“Please pray for our family too. We are not physically ill, but we are sick at heart and spirit. It is so hard for Dawn and I to accept and understand that we made some of our loyal customers sick when we were trying so hard to provide food for them just like we feed our own children!
“To everyone who reads this, please pause a few minutes right now with our family in prayer for any and all who are sick.”
Shank cautioned those who might be tempted to criticize his tack of openness. “Please, please… Those of you who have not been ill, do not criticize us for being this honest. I know what the lawyers and legal counselors would say. But frankly I don’t care anymore what they say. Dawn and I have prayed, fasted and agonized long and hard over how to say all of this.
“We have decided that the only way we will ever have peace is to follow our hearts, our conscience, our God and His Word. We sense all four of these guiding lights in harmony with our decision and we have peace.
“If our family’s sustainable, local, know-your-farmer-shake-his-hand food production and distribution model cannot stand up to Honesty and Truth…then I guess Dawn and I are in the wrong business.”
Surely there are any number of lessons to be learned from this episode. Shank has already said he is in the process of implementing changes and improvements in his dairy’s operation, to reduce the chances of problems going forward.
In the meantime, he is serving as a refreshing model of openness and understanding, and how best to handle a crisis of foodborne illness. You have to feel for the Shank family and its customers. You know that his dairy will be the stronger for everything it has gone through these recent days.
As this shows, raw milk can make people sick. But just because it CAN, doesn't mean it DOES. As others have pointed out, there are plenty of other foods that are perfectly legal that can make people sick and are not regulated like raw milk. I hope that the Shank family's prompt response will show that responsible behavior in farming can be a great tool to limiting possible outbreaks. I know that it will be used by opponents to raw milk to further regulate.
Below is a quote from a homeschooling dad and university professor that I know. While it has nothing to do with raw milk, it does speak to the government's desire to regulate. You could substitute "raw milk" with "homeschooling" very easily:
"Government likes to grow. Every problem is seen as a reason for additional regulation, an additional layer of bureaucracy, or an additional agency. Every difficult decision is seen as a reason for additional specificity (details) in the rules. Eventually, the "problem" is covered with bureaucracy. Here's another pattern. Government and other institutions hate to shrink. Therefore, as homeschooling grows (or even continues) more and more school employees and administrators will see it as a threat – as an erosion of their power base. They will look for ways to eliminate or regulate homeschooling. They will find a few (very few) bad homeschooling families and use them as an excuse to come after all of us."
The problem on the Shank farm will certainly be used as an example. I fear their remorse and responsibility will also be used as "proof" that raw milk is inherently bad. Wouldn't it be nice if they used Hershberer's remorse and responsibility to prove that he should continue to provide his clients with food.
I would also like to remind everyone that our constitiutional rights (thus far) are only upheld if they were intended to be protected in the first place. In the Dred Scott case, he was denied is constitutional rights by the US Supreme Court because the Bill of Rights was never intended to apply to blacks in the first place. In Snyder v. Massachusetts (1934) the US Supreme Court held that due process is violated if a practice or rule so offends some principle of justice so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental. And who gets to decide which traditions and conscience and people get the honor of being defended as a fundamental right?
Yes it is. A rarity in the current big govt/business environment.
http://abcnews.go(DOT)com/Blotter/hidden-outbreak-restaurants-stay-anonymous/story?id=15505386#.TywGtcicySo
"In fact, in dozens of cases after the outbreaks were over, the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control kept the names of restaurants that were part of investigations secret, apparently for fear of damaging their relationships with the companies. "
"fear of damaging their relationships with the companies. " That would be MORE important than public safety. Further proof of who is sleeping with whom….
The implications of this are that small scale,simple,close to the consumer dairies can be safer.The complex milking systems that are being used now were developed after pasteurization began with pasteurization as a necessary part of the system.Cooling in cans by well water, as is done with grade B milk, is recognized as superior for cheese making because the psychotropic bacteria (pseudomonas) are not competitive with the lactic acid bacteria at that temperature. Twelve hours is long enough to expect to be able to hold milk at that temp (45 to 50 degrees F ) before it is used for cheese making.
I agree with what you say in the second paragraph, with one exception. I would not cool the milk below 50F. Lactic acid bacteria are not active below 50F, but psychrotrophic bacteria are actually more active in that temperature range (between 40 and 50F) than at true refrigeration temps (under 40F).
In France, the temperature for overnight milk storage is mandated by the AOC regulations for Comte, a gruyere-family cheese which is also the most produced cheese by volume in France (it is a raw milk cheese). Though they are using modern milk pipelines and bulk tanks, the milk cannot be cooled below 50F, and the rennet must be added within 24 hours of harvest. Keep in mind this is a hard, long-aged cheese, in which the curd is cooked to as high as 125F. (These are all risk reduction factors.)
I disagree with your first paragraph. Pseudomonas growth is slowed at colder temperatures — its just that (unlike lactic acid bacteria) it is still able to grow. So, the colder the better, provided you don't freeze the milk. The main reason that pseudomonas contributes to campylobacter survival is because the pseudomonas consume oxygen. The best strategy is just to have very low pseudomonas population to begin with.
In fresh milk, prior to acidification, the main reason that lactic acid bacteria cause campy to expire is because of the hydrogen peroxide they produce.
In my first two paragraphs above, I was talking about milk for cheese making.
In the last two, I am talking about milk for direct fluid consumption.
In the latter scenario, cooling the milk quickly and maintaining it at a very cold temperature is important. I disagree with Miguel about this. Either you cool the milk all the way to refrigeration temperatures or you don't. Doing something in between actually contributes to pseudomonas and psychrotrophic growth.
Bill, Are you talking about keeping the equipment clean ,here?
I like to completely avoid the use of most strong sanitizers for my own health and also because they encourage the selection of resistant bacteria.
What is the source of these pseudomonas bacteria? Besides sanitation is there anything we should be doing to keep it's population low?
Is the goal of long "shelf life" one we should be working for or should we work towards shorter distance between the cow and the fresh milk drinker?
At 50 degrees the lactic acid bacteria would control the growth of pseudomonas and delay the souring of the milk for 24 hours? What happens if the milk is kept at refrigerator temperature after this? How long do you think it would still taste fresh?
Obviously,if a farm like Edwin's has this campylobacter problem,it is a very difficult thing to prevent.
The goal should definitely be a long shelf-left, because time is the enemy of campylobacter. The longer the milk sits around, the more likely the campy will expire.
When milk has a short shelf-life, it creates incentives for producers to sell it more quickly, and consumers to consume it sooner.
As for sanitizers, if you prefer to avoid chlorine, there is an excellent new-generation alternative/natural sanitizer that I highly recommend, especially for fluid milk applications (it is less applicable to cheese making)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peracetic_acid
Peroxyacetic acid breaks down into vinegar (acetic acid) and hydrogen peroxide upon contact with organic substances (like milk). The peroxide further breaks down into water and oxygen… and oxygen is an enemy of campylobacter.
From what I have been told, dairies which switch from chlorine to peroxyacetic acid experience an instant shelf-life extension of 2 to 3 days, without changing any of their other practices. The only draw back is that it is more expensive than chlorine. Food grade hydrogen peroxide also will have similar effects.
Kristen
If pseudomonas can protect campylobacter from damage by oxygen, I don't see how sanitizing with oxygen will effect either one of these if they are both present.I'm sure Edwin was both cooling the milk rapidly and sanitizing properly.These things don't seem to always work.Are you suggesting that we just continue doing the same thing and hope it works in spite of evidence that it doesn't?
But rarely is that what's really going on when raw milk gets blamed
in other instances, historical and lately, raw milk dairies are correct to be VERY skeptical in face of allegations from those who have an ax to grind against independent producers
this week in America, about 6 million people will consume whole fresh REAL MILK without getting sick. In fact, they'll be better off for it. Compare that with the safety record of any other foodstuff you can name in commerce
when you realize that the govt. really does lie to the People – on this and on so many other issues – let's see you acknowledge that, too
I am not familiar with the practices used on Edwin's farm and creamery, nor do I know what his milk's shelf life is or how fast it gets into consumer's hands. Those are all very important considerations.
Regarding sanitizing with oxygen, a small population of Pseudomonas cannot absorb a large oxygen load. A large pseudomonas population, on the other hand, can absorb such an oxygen load. (note: I'm not suggesting that is what happened with Edwin)
The reason that some cheese makers do not want their milk cooled below 50F has to do with other quality issues. Cooling milk to refrigerator temperatures causes the casein to become more soluble, which changes the way that the milk coagulates when it is warmed back up. Cooling below 50F also activates the indigenous lipases and causes degradation of milkfat. This practice is absolutely not advisable for someone selling fluid raw milk directly to the public. It is for cheese makers who intend to turn the milk into cheese within 24 hours of harvest.
I think most of your suggestions here are very inadvisable for someone like Edwin. The advantage of having a "simple close to the consumer dairy" is the consumers themselves and the connection it creates between consumer and producer. It has nothing to do with milk quality or shelf-life issues.
Also, I think it's good practice for the dairy to leave a bit of head space in the filling process. That little bit of oxygen at the top of the container will also be prophylactic to knock down campy (again, if it's there). The zeal of filling a container smack to the top to give greatest value, is in this case not the best course in preventing possible campy problems.
By degradation of the milkfat do you mean oxidation of the milkfat or is something else going on? I think you are saying that milk to be used for cheesemaking should be kept at or above 50 F,while milk to be consumed as fluid raw milk should be cooled quickly and kept as cold as possible.Keeping the milk at or above 50 F results in better flavor in the finished cheese.Wouldn't degradation of the milk fat also affect the flavor of the fresh milk?
Ed is handling this challenge with grace and transparency. But…I think he is being just a little tough on his own heart and soul. Ed never tried to make anyone sick, in fact he works tirelessly to do the contrary. He delivers health to his wonderful consumers.
Prior to 1972, the CDC and FDA did not classify campy as a human pathogen. It was simply travelers diarrhea. I bet that if a Titer was run on most raw milk consumers, it would show an anti body to campy. One university study showed this exact result. A great test right now would be test every one that drank Ed Shanks raw milk and did not get sick….I bet the majority have a positive Titer for campy.
This just shows the distance that real foods have come from their consumers in the last 50 years. When mankind messes with immunity this is what happens.
No one wants to see human illness….no one. But at least campy gives immunity and then the consumer should be safe from it. Campy is also relatively easy to treat with cipro antibiotics.
In a meeting with top regulators this week in CA, I said, a raw milk farmer is not a raw milk farmer until after a recall….it is the farmer that stands back up after the hit and dusts himself off, hugs his consumers and makes improvements is the real student and the real farmer.
Ed is my friend…he and I speak regularly. He wants to be the best he can be. He will be better than ever…..God bless him, his consumers and his family.
http://www.medscape(DOT)com/viewarticle/471331 (I don't agree with much of medscape website-sorta like the govt)
http://books.google (DOT)com/books?id=U9Y-JXX6t90C&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=activated+charcoal+campylobacter&source=bl&ots=loPNuFr0hG&sig=-dV5qolTMnqQdfTO99XlEfweYBc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=D6ksT4nTOMmEtge30dX1Dw&ved=0CGQQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=activated%20charcoal%20campylobacter&f=false
page 171
Degradation of milkfat from the indigenous lipases is hydrolytic rancidity, not oxidative rancidity. It is a consequence of the free-fatty-acids being cleaved from the triglyceride backbone which holds them together, among other things. Free-fatty-acids are very aromatic compounds that produce the classic "rancid" aroma you find especially in hard Italian cheeses like parmesan or asiago. (However, before this kind of rancidity can happen, the phospholipids in the membrane must be broken down, to expose the nonpolar ends of the milkfat to the indigenous lipases. That's a whole issue in itself…)
The reason a cheese maker is concerned about cooling the milk is because of the long-term effects this has on cheese. The lipase activation from cooling milk does not manifest itself immediately in a rancid flavor in the milk, but rather, in the aging process with the cheese over time.
The concerns of a cheese maker are somewhat different than the concerns with bottling fluid drinking milk, though there are many similarities.
On a positive note, 5 years ago an open acknowledgement that that raw milk made people ill would not have taken place. Instead there would be adamant denial and some other food source would have been blamed (like CAFO produced chicken) and rhetoric about a conspiracy against raw milk would have taken place.
When cow poop gets in the milk and people become ill, there is no winner. Raw milk is a high risk food for pathogens because the anus of the cow is so close the udders. Steve, with all due respect, until there is an actual study that confirms Ted Beals hypothesis about Campylobacter and oxygen, it really shouldnt be discussed as fact that not filling the bottle all the way and waiting a few days before consuming raw milk would render it free from the Campy pathogen.
This Amish familys system is different from an outsider coming to the farm to purchase and consume raw milk. This family lives with the animals and comes from a lineage of farmers living a natural, farm life. Their immune systems have built up immunities to pathogens. It is nave to think that outsiders immune systems would react the same.
I think it is great that people are supporting their local farmer, but when it comes to drinking raw milk, it is probably best to learn how to pasteurize it at home. This is a guarantee that if pathogens are in the milk, they will be killed.
I think it would behoove the Shank family, and other Amish farmers who sell raw milk to outsiders, to educated them about their lack of immunities and teach them how to pasteurize the milk before consuming it. This is a win-win for all. The farmer is making money and no one will become ill. If they want the good bacteria from the milk, after pasteurizing it, make kefir or yogurt.
With all this talk about the correct temperature for raw cheese, what is the temperature raw milk should be chilled to and be kept at in the refrigerator? Somewhere I remember reading 40 degrees. Is that correct?
When people are transporting large amounts of raw milk in a cooler, is the correct chilling temperature maintained during transport? Is ice used?
Mark, why dont you have a conversation with Mari Tardiff about Campylobacter being just a travelers diarrhea? Dont down play how serious a Campylobacter infection can be to someone who may be genetically predisposed to developing Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
February 3, 2012 | Registered CommenterMary Wise "
The above is from the last blog entry. It is correct, the fda and state health depts are SUPPOSED to protect the publics health from those who sell adulterated foods and make people sick….yet they aren't doing their jobs very well. They did not disclose that it was taco bell in their sights for the recent outbreak, and they haven't shut them down, just continued to allow them to keep on selling potential contaminated sludge.
If I own the cow, in part or in whole, the govt have no business interfering when I get my milk or my poop or anything else to do with that cow, horse,goat,sheep, pig or chicken, etc. Cow shares/farm shares aren't for the general public, they are private.
http://www.fda (DOT) gov/Safety/Recalls/default.htm Over 40 recalls this year alone, today is only the 4th of Feb. Just imagine how much they do miss. Frightening indeed.
"The intensity with which raw milk supporters believe in this product is almost unheard of, certainly for a food," says Sarah Klein, an attorney for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "It's like snake oil."
She is calling raw milk snake oil? LMAO what a pathetic joke. With all the other much more pathogenic crap the govt allows to be foisted onto the public . Talk about a forked tongue…
"Klein says advocates often mislead consumers by describing bucolic settings and happy cows."
The only "happy cow" crap I've seen is from the Ca milk ads…… for pasteurized milk not raw milk.
"These are still animals, they defecate inches from where the milk is produced,"
So is she saying that boiled poop filled milk is ok? Is she also envisioning the cafos?
I would guess that most farmers that milk more than one or two cows use a milking machine thus it is a closed system and poop can't get into the milk…
The use of the word "guarantee" to describe pasteurized milk safety is highly misleading erroneous and ignorant
Mary….. If you believe that pasteurization is a guarantee of safety then please tell that to the three that are dead from the 2007 listeria outbreak fromWhittier Farms.
The last time I checked. Illness with increased immunity sure the hell beats being dead. In fact there have been zero death from raw milk since 1973 with your lovely guaranteed safe pasteurized milk killing at least 70 in the same time period and sickening 400,000
Or more. And no gift of immunity.
Your disregard for the data makes me think you get a check from the FDA. Stop the guaranteed BS
The reason that the anus is located near vaginas is because that is how immunity is ttranfered from moms to babies at birth and in the case of cows nursing after birth Your fixation on fecal bacteria is not grounded in physiology.
Raw milk is not a major source of illness in the USA. Get over it.
FYI, the listeria case you like to site so often was caused by chocolate syrup that was added to the milk after it was pasteurized. The syrup was contaminated with listeria, not the milk.
Yes. Yes. I know you dont want to address the fact that cow poop getting in the milk makes people sick. Why would we want to address the real issue?
Mark, what in the hell does the human birthing process have to do with raw milk? Stick to the issue at hand. I would think you would be a bit more interested in keeping cow poop out of your milk since two outbreaks resulting in children becoming quit ill has been life changing for you. But hey, who am I to tell you how to think? Go ahead. Keep claiming that cow poop in your milk is good for people. The facts seem to present a different reality.
So if cow poop didnt cause this resent raw milk outbreak, then swine poop or bird poop from the farm got into the milk. Some sort of poop caused the illness.
Denial is a funny thing. How can you produce raw milk and be so fearful about discussing the reality of the business you are in? Poop happens.
http://www.marlerclark(DOT) com/case_news/view/whittier-farms-pasteurized-milk-listeria-outbreak-2007
"The investigation found Listeria in samples taken from the dairy. Those samples matched the victims cultures, as well as that in the milk."
http://www.aphl (DOT) org/conferences/proceedings/Documents/2008_12th_Annual_PulseNet_Update_Meeting/7-StilesListeriainMass.pdf
it was in the milk AND flavored milk and in the environment
Regarding the comment to wait a couple days and leave the bottle cap loose is not based in science to "kill" Campylobacter. In fact, the one study that examined Campylobacter survival in raw milk using multiple strains found that the bacteria lived out to 21 days. All strains were recoverable out to 7 days. So, are they suggesting to wait 1-3 weeks before drinking raw milk? Interestingly, the strain isolated 3 weeks later was from cattle. These inoculations were done at high levels, but the survival curve shouldn't change significantly under the same conditions with a lower inoculum (it just gets harder to detect with culture methods).
The theory of letting air into the bottle to "kill" Campylobacter appears to be a misunderstanding (or misrepresentation?) of the microaerobic nature of C. jejuni. Microaerobic means small amounts of oxygen. In the lab, C. jejuni is often grown in 5% oxygen, and will tolerate even more oxygen compared with some other Campylobacter species.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC242162/pdf/aem00180-0150.pdf
As clarification, the 2007 Mass outbreak from listeria was caused by post-pasteurization contamination of milk (flavored and unflavored). It came from a relatively small dairy that did home deliveries – not a CAFO. The outbreak strain was found in the finished product and the processing area (drain). This is somewhat similar to the cantaloupe outbreak findings.
From the CDC report:
"The dairy's records indicated that the plant's equipment met federal standards for time, temperature, and flow for effective pasteurization. The facility did not have an environmental monitoring program for L monocytogenes. This is not required by law, but often is implemented as a best practice by larger food processors of ready-to-eat foods. Contamination, as demonstrated by the positive environmental samples, was documented in close proximity to areas where hoses were used to clean equipment. On February 1, 2008, dairy A decided to permanently close the milk processing facility, citing an inability to assume the financial burden that mitigation would require."
It would be helpful to know where the breakdown occurred in the chain of production and distribution for this Campylobacter outbreak. It could have been during milking with accidental introduction of fecal material (C. jejuni is a harmless commensal fecal organism that is very common in cattle and other livestock and wildlife). Alternatively, if there was an ongoing problem on the dairy with Campylobacter contamination, I wonder if there could be issue with persistence in the pipelines (biofilms). C. jejuni is much more fragile than Listeria, but it will survive for prolonged periods in water. If its a longer-term problem, there could be more than one genetic strain involved.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5740a1.htm
MW
Regarding the comment to wait a couple days and leave the bottle cap loose is not based in science to "kill" Campylobacter. In fact, the one study that examined Campylobacter survival in raw milk using multiple strains found that the bacteria lived out to 21 days. All strains were recoverable out to 7 days. So, are they suggesting to wait 1-3 weeks before drinking raw milk? Interestingly, the strain isolated 3 weeks later was from cattle. These inoculations were done at high levels, but the survival curve shouldn't change significantly under the same conditions with a lower inoculum (it just gets harder to detect with culture methods).
The theory of letting air into the bottle to "kill" Campylobacter appears to be a misunderstanding (or misrepresentation?) of the microaerobic nature of C. jejuni. Microaerobic means small amounts of oxygen. In the lab, C. jejuni is often grown in 5% oxygen, and will tolerate even more oxygen compared with some other Campylobacter species.
http://www.ncbi (DOT) nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC242162/pdf/aem00180-0150.pdf
As clarification, the 2007 Mass outbreak from listeria was caused by post-pasteurization contamination of milk (flavored and unflavored). It came from a relatively small dairy that did home deliveries – not a CAFO. The outbreak strain was found in the finished product and the processing area (drain). This is somewhat similar to the cantaloupe outbreak findings.
From the CDC report:
"The dairy's records indicated that the plant's equipment met federal standards for time, temperature, and flow for effective pasteurization. The facility did not have an environmental monitoring program for L monocytogenes. This is not required by law, but often is implemented as a best practice by larger food processors of ready-to-eat foods. Contamination, as demonstrated by the positive environmental samples, was documented in close proximity to areas where hoses were used to clean equipment. On February 1, 2008, dairy A decided to permanently close the milk processing facility, citing an inability to assume the financial burden that mitigation would require."
It would be helpful to know where the breakdown occurred in the chain of production and distribution for this Campylobacter outbreak. It could have been during milking with accidental introduction of fecal material (C. jejuni is a harmless commensal fecal organism that is very common in cattle and other livestock and wildlife). Alternatively, if there was an ongoing problem on the dairy with Campylobacter contamination, I wonder if there could be issue with persistence in the pipelines (biofilms). C. jejuni is much more fragile than Listeria, but it will survive for prolonged periods in water. If its a longer-term problem, there could be more than one genetic strain involved.
http://www.cdc (DOT) gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5740a1.htm
MW
Regarding the comment to wait a couple days and leave the bottle cap loose is not based in science to "kill" Campylobacter. In fact, the one study that examined Campylobacter survival in raw milk using multiple strains found that the bacteria lived out to 21 days. All strains were recoverable out to 7 days. So, are they suggesting to wait 1-3 weeks before drinking raw milk? Interestingly, the strain isolated 3 weeks later was from cattle. These inoculations were done at high levels, but the survival curve shouldn't change significantly under the same conditions with a lower inoculum (it just gets harder to detect with culture methods).
Doyle, M. P., and D. J. Roman. 1982. Prevalence and survival of Campylobacter jejuni in unpasteurized milk. Appl Environ Microbiol 44:1154-8.
The theory of letting air into the bottle to "kill" Campylobacter appears to be a misunderstanding (or misrepresentation?) of the microaerobic nature of C. jejuni. Microaerobic means small amounts of oxygen. In the lab, C. jejuni is often grown in 5% oxygen with shaking in an incubator, and will tolerate even more oxygen compared with some other Campylobacter species. Loosening the cap and shaking the bottle isn't going to do anything to control Campylobacter, although maybe it will distribute the bacteria more evenly in the bottle/jar!
As clarification, the 2007 Mass outbreak from listeria was caused by post-pasteurization contamination of milk (flavored and unflavored). It came from a relatively small dairy that did home deliveries – not a CAFO. The outbreak strain was found in the finished product and the processing area (drain). This is somewhat similar to the cantaloupe outbreak findings.
From the CDC report:
"The dairy's records indicated that the plant's equipment met federal standards for time, temperature, and flow for effective pasteurization. The facility did not have an environmental monitoring program for L monocytogenes. This is not required by law, but often is implemented as a best practice by larger food processors of ready-to-eat foods. Contamination, as demonstrated by the positive environmental samples, was documented in close proximity to areas where hoses were used to clean equipment. On February 1, 2008, dairy A decided to permanently close the milk processing facility, citing an inability to assume the financial burden that mitigation would require."
CDC. 2008. Outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes infections associated with pasteurized milk from a local dairyMassachusetts, 2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 57:1097-100.
It would be helpful to know where the breakdown occurred in the chain of production and distribution for this Campylobacter outbreak. It could have been during milking with accidental introduction of fecal material (C. jejuni is a harmless commensal fecal organism that is very common in cattle and other livestock and wildlife). Alternatively, if there was an ongoing problem on the dairy with Campylobacter contamination, I wonder if there could be issue with persistence in the pipelines (biofilms). C. jejuni is much more fragile than Listeria, but it will survive for prolonged periods in water. If its a longer-term problem, there could be more than one genetic strain involved.
MW
My friend called me this week after he heard about the Family Cow campylobacter outbreak. Guess who the great Pennsylvania farmer was? They still are his customer on non-raw milk products.
As I said the other day, Mr. Shank seems like a great guy:
http://www.marlerblog.com/case-news/if-i-drank-raw-milk-i-might-buy-it-from-ed-shanks-dairy/
I wish his customers a quick recovery. My strong suspicion is that with the passion of his customer base, he could sell pasteurized milk instead of raw.
I don't see anything wrong with your suggestion that raw dairy farmers "teach (customers) how to pasteurize the milk before consuming it." My guess is that most won't want the lessons. They know what they have to do to pasteurize the milk, but they are at the raw dairy for raw milk.
Bill Marler,
Re your "strong suspicion (that Shank) could sell pasteurized milk instead of raw." I highly doubt it. If people want pasteurized milk, they'll go to the grocery store. They go to Ed Shank (and other such dairies) specifically because they want their milk unprocessed. That's something the public health community doesn't quite get. I've heard recommendations that raw dairies run their milk through filters, or use ultraviolet, or other such schemes. Won't work. Unprocessed is the key here.
Will the illnesses at Shank's dairy change some minds? I would expect he'll lose a few customers. But he'll probably get some new ones because of the publicity as well. And that's as it should be. People should be able to make up their own minds as to whether they consider the illnesses a big enough risk to not drink unpasteurized milk, and return to the factory food.
David
"there is a principle which is a bar against all information, proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance : that principle is, contempt prior to investigation"
in B. C. thousands of people get sick from campylobacter, every year. It's called "Beaver fever", because it comes from local water systems. The health authorities merely issue a "boil water advisory". At this point in time, suspicion is that the sterilizer at the Family Cow diary wasn't making the water hot enough.
I shake me head in dismay at the insanity of someone faulting raw milk producers =
"How can you produce raw milk and be so fearful about discussing the reality of the business you are in?"
on the forum where we're DOING that in real time ?! Perhaps one of the criics (vipers and vultures and nay-sayers) can give me the URL of the website where commercial producers of 'homo milk', do the same thing, transparent to the world?
As for MM's battle cry " Poop happens". = true, but the mentally-healthy individual puts it in its proper place, rather than wallowing in it
Many of the folks that I have spoken to (true, folks who have been negatively impacted by consuming raw milk) are buying raw milk because it is hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm, and they have been told that because of those factors it cannot have pathogens in it.
It seems to me that pasteurization of the same type of "real milk" might well be safer to customers and to farmers.
http://familycow.proboards (DOT)com/index.cgi?board=cow&action=display&thread=7934&page=2
"He said one thing that came up very quickly after Dec. 27 was what to do with the 130 cows, which produce about 1,000 gallons of milk every day. He said Whittier has been able to sell its raw milk to a different processor."
130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk..
http://familycow.proboards (DOT)com/index.cgi?board=cow&action=display&thread=7934&page=2
"He said one thing that came up very quickly after Dec. 27 was what to do with the 130 cows, which produce about 1,000 gallons of milk every day. He said Whittier has been able to sell its raw milk to a different processor."
130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk..
http://familycow (DOT) proboards (DOT)com/index.cgi?board=cow&action=display&thread=7934&page=2
"He said one thing that came up very quickly after Dec. 27 was what to do with the 130 cows, which produce about 1,000 gallons of milk every day. He said Whittier has been able to sell its raw milk to a different processor."
130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk..
http://familycow (DOT) proboards (DOT)com/index (DOT) cgi?board=cow&action=display&thread=7934&page=2
"The Whittiers have about 330 cows, and they milk about 130 cows daily, which produce about 1,000 gallons of milk every day. Mr. Whittier said the raw milk is being sold to a different processor.
330 cows and milking 130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk..
Are you impugning The Family Cow that milks 200+ cows and OPDC that milks 400+ cows?
MW
You stated "relatively small dairy". That is NOT a small dairy to me and that is what I stated.
You often twist, or attempt to twist others words, your reading comprehension is in question.
I wonder if OP would have been able to sell his milk to another processor while he was shut down…..
Fair enough regarding a total "kill" vs. inhibition. But, the WAPF specifically cites the Doyle study to support claims of competitive inhibition (without a caveat about the initial inoculum). They can't have it both ways. They fail to cite two references to human feeding studies that show 800-1000 cells, and 500 cells in 200 ml of milk, respectively, could induce disease. That is a low inoculum. Clearly, in this latest outbreak, there were enough viable cells in the raw milk to induce disease in at least 38 customers. Competitive inhibition didn't provide protection.
Black, R. E., M. M. Levine, M. L. Clements, T. P. Hughes, and M. J. Blaser. 1988. Experimental Campylobacter jejuni infection in humans. J Infect Dis 157:472-9.10.
Holt, P. E. 1981. Role of campylobacter spp. in human and animal disease: a review. J R Soc Med 74:437-40.
MW
I wasn't twisting your words, but perhaps misinterpreted? You implied that the Whittier Dairy implicated in the Listeria deaths was a CAFO because they had 130 milking cows. This is in the range of current raw milk dairies implicated in outbreaks – do you consider them CAFOs, and do you think that's a risk factor for an outbreak? Just wondering your thought on it. In the "big" picture, anything under 500 milking cows is small relative to conventional CAFO's. Where do you draw the line.
We've seen outbreaks linked to dairies ranging from tiny to large, and we've also seen a lack of outbreaks in the same spectrum. Does size matter, or are there other factors at play? The attention is always on those with problems, but would also be interesting to look at those without problems, big and small.
MW
mw:You implied that the Whittier Dairy implicated in the Listeria deaths was a CAFO because they had 130 milking cows.
ME: In my above statement, where do I IMPLY that Whittier was a cafo? Again, your reading comprehension is in question.
So, what was your point bringing up CAFOs in this statement? How does it relate to my comment or the current post?
"330 cows and milking 130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk."
MW
"David, I am not quite sure that in all cases, people are buying raw milk because it is raw milk per se.
Many of the folks that I have spoken to (true, folks who have been negatively impacted by consuming raw milk) are buying raw milk because it is hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm, and they have been told that because of those factors it cannot have pathogens in it."
~ ~ ~ ~
Mary M– I think I've found the poop you've been smelling.
Bill, you need to talk to more people. At least listen to David if you can't or won't.
People who drink raw milk want it raw. Yes, most of us want all of those other things (hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm)–I know I do, but I want it raw too (uncooked, unprocessed, the way it comes naturally). I am lucky to live in an area where I can get milk that is hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm AND single herd AND VAT pasteurized, but I choose the raw milk instead.
I simply don't believe the statement: "they have been told that because of those factors it cannot have pathogens in it." Frankly, it sounds made up.
From the Weston A. Price Foundation website, written by Sally Fallon:
"Milk is indeed an excellent medium for the survival and growth of bacteria-good bacteria. When pathogenic bacteria are added to raw milk, the good bacteria eliminate them, as shown in published studies and in recent tests with the milk from Organic Pastures Dairy in California (see http://www.organicpastures.com). And raw milk from healthy cows, produced under sanitary conditions, simply does not contain pathogenic bacteria."
http://www.westonaprice.org/press/press-release-2003apr11
Steve, the two suggestions you made about possibly preventing campylobacteriosis are harmless suggestions as long as people are not under the impression that these two suggestions will prevent an illness. I know you respect Ted Beals, but it is also fair to acknowledge that the WAPF has been responsible for spreading misinformation about the safety of raw milk.
Sylvia, Mark will correct me if Im wrong, but I believe when OPDC was shut down for a month he was allowed to sell his milk to a processor. I think I read this information on this blog or FB. Milk sold to a processor is going to be pasteurized, so it doesnt matter if it has pathogens. That is the whole point of pasteurization.
Can someone please answer my question about the temperature raw milk needs to be cooled to and kept at in the refrigerator?
If pasteurized milk purchased from a local farmer where the cows are grass fed and the milk is hormone and antibiotic free is considered a processed food, then all other food that is cooked must also fall in the processed category. Does heating/cooking a food place it in the category of processed?
You know, the Shank family has little to be sorry about. Their willingness however to humbly accept responsibility exemplifies an integrity and honor rarely if at all practiced by our governments and its bureaucracies who despite all the harm they inflict on individuals of all ages via their vaccines and fluoridated water etc., use every opportunity to weasel their way out of responsibility. Thanks Dave!
Humans are their own worst enemy because they have willfully chosen to be at odds with specific natural forces, which they deem to be a detriment to their happiness and well-being.
Genuine good health can only be achieved by living in harmony with all organisms.
Intervene in order to prevent dehydration, allow the fever if there is any to do its job and avoid as much as possible antibiotics and other drugs that increase overall toxicity and disrupts the process of natural immunity.
We were never promised happiness on this earth yet it was suggested that the truth would set us free. Those who point the finger at organisms and imply that people who have freely chosen to enhance their immunity by consuming whole natural foods are nave, are the ones who have allowed fear to manipulate their idea of the truth.
Karen
I use activated charcoal as a poultice on insect stings or bites such as from bees and spiders. It is very effective at drawing out toxins and reducing the swelling.
Ken
ME: "330 cows and milking 130 cows is not a small dairy, unless you are comparing it to the cafos. Gee he was allowed to sell his milk to another processor…yes indeed, feed the people contaminated milk."
MW is there a reason you are being obtuse? I will break down the sentence for you since you cannot comprehend it;
" 330 cows and milking 130" cows is not a small dairy–obviously to me, 330 or 130 cows in not a small dairy.
"unless you are comparing it to the cafos." In this portion of the sentence, I am trying to clarify if YOU are comparing the 330/130 head to a cafo…
mw: How does it relate to my comment or the current post?
ME: Wow, you are more handicapped than I realized. Your words only serve to reinforce
stigmatization of poor cognition of govt workers.
Bill Marler said, Many of the folks that I have spoken toare buying raw milk because it is hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm, and they have been told that because of those factors it cannot have pathogens in it.
I think we can all agree the Weston Price Foundation advocates that raw milk come from hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farms. They also make such statements as:
but you can be assured that if basic sanitation measures are followed, raw milk is completely safe
Raw milk contains numerous components that assist in: Killing pathogens in the milkPreventing pathogen absorption across the intestinal wallStrengthening the Immune System
And yes, And raw milk from healthy cows, produced under sanitary conditions, simply does not contain pathogenic bacteria.
Indeed, the people Bill Marler refers to in his quote have been told this – by the Weston Price Foundation. He did not make it up.
THIS:
Many of the folks that I have spoken to (true, folks who have been negatively impacted by consuming raw milk) are buying raw milk because it is hormone free, organic, grass fed, local, small farm, and they have been told that because of those factors it cannot have pathogens in it."
IS NOT THAT:
"Milk is indeed an excellent medium for the survival and growth of bacteria-good bacteria. When pathogenic bacteria are added to raw milk, the good bacteria eliminate them, as shown in published studies and in recent tests with the milk from Organic Pastures Dairy in California (see http://www.organicpastures.com). And raw milk from healthy cows, produced under sanitary conditions, simply does not contain pathogenic bacteria."
Notice that Marler's statement says nothing about sanitary conditions or healthy cows.
If it isn't the same, it's different.
Unfortunately, Bill Marler has represented many people who have become ill from raw milk. Without Bill Marler, these illnesses would be swept under the carpet. Thanks to Bill, I have had the opportunity to connect with multiple raw milk victims. We all have the same story. We thought it was safe. Most had read WAPF information or had been given WAPF information by their farmer. NOT ONE OF US EVER THOUGHT IN OUR WILDEST DREAMS OUR CHILDREN COULD BE ON DEATHS DOOR AFTER DRINKING RAW MILK! We missed that phrase in the literature information.
MW
Good to have you back in the conversation. I still think you and I should have been matched up at Harvard. Maybe soon some other place.
To be clear, the reasons for drinking raw milk are the following according to our consumers:
1. It is delicious
2. It is digestible
3. It is not inflammation causing
4. It is healing to GUT, allergies and asthma and other medical conditions.
This data comes directly from our OP consumers from polls and are listed in order of importance.
In addition, the reason raw milk consumers chose raw milk is because, they get sick from pasteurized milk. During our recall, we were called by hundreds of people that were desperate because their kids became sick from pasteurized milk….and they needed their raw milk back!!! These illnesses are not in the PulseNet database. This is exactly why pasteurized milk consumption is in steep decline. The FDA lists pasteurized milk as the most allergenic food in America for kids. Raw milk moms are not stupid….they are to the contrary quite smart. They know the risks of drinking raw milk…and more importantly, they know first hand the risks of not drinking raw milk. Also….the raw whey protein is not raw anymore….raw whey protein is critical to the MAST cell stabilization action. An action not potentiated by cooked milk.
Our sales of raw milk have hit all time record highs this January. We are short of supply. We are focused like never before on key elements of our food safety plan. Key elements that we have learned are more critical than others. Why are sales higher than ever? The product is better than ever, we are better than ever, we know that calves and kids do not match.
This will also happen to Ed Shank. Why???? Because Ed Shank will get better and learn more. He will emerge smarter, stronger, better. That is what a pioneer does. They learn and improve !!!
Raw milk is not perfect and yes it can make some people sick…but a weak immune system can kill you….asthma kills 4000 per year.
In my book rare illness and beneficial acquired immunity sure beats death. Death from FDA drugs taken for asthma. Death from weakened immunity.
You nay Sayers just keep on throwing your rocks….and I will just keep on getting better and better and delivering delicious raw milk to our consumers that are demanding more and more of it for very important reasons.
Raw milk is the chosen food. It kills off pathogens! (you cannot get sick from it! It is safe! Feed it to your kids!) Blah blah blah. Ignore the fear mongering food safety people, moms of kids who got sick from raw milk, or especially that ambulance chasing lawyer!!!
Blah blah blah blah…
You all make my head spin. Why do you hate people who cite real scientific literature? Why are you so angry with Mary who represents the moms whose kids were sickened after they bought the LIES, yes, LIES spread by Sally Fallon? Why do you hate people who've called, emailed and spoken with Sally Fallon about the inaccuracy of her statements and yet she still continues to make them? I don't see her marketing her jersey cow raw milk to the general public (why she's a cheesemaker now…) but shell sure tell the Amish folks to stick their necks out there and cross state lines and sell raw milk as the panacea to all that ills you.
MARK, so glad you keep getting better and smarter after having several outbreaks from your raw milk. I wonder when the next one's going to be and how many kids will get injured? I wonder if YOUR sh*t don't stink, never mind the cowsh*t?
Who friggin cares how many people die or are sickened from any other food or even pasteurized milk products? You sure dont seem to care about all the sickened people who got sick by drinking raw milk!
It's not black or white…drink raw milk or drink CAFO pasteurized crap.
I think most people even interested in raw milk come to it from the perspective of wanting to support the family farmer and not the industrialized food system. I know I did. I listened to Sally Fallon and the WAPF mommy bloggers. I seriously was brainwashed slowly over time. That's what it felt like!
How about this…drink raw milk if you are an adult and have really good guy flora. Drink it if you are robust and healthy. If you are a child, don't drink raw milk but drink gently pasteurized small farm gently pasteurized milk. Or drink raw milk yourself and gently pasteurize it for your kids. If you can't tolerate milk, don't drink it! Heal and seal your gut lining first before you try it again later!!!
David, yes. People want the freedom to choose their raw milk. Just like people want the freedom to smoke doobies. Marijuana is soooo natural and helps people with cancer! People have been smoking it for hundreds of years! Maybe y'all raw milkers will have business fronts soon with darkened windows and a security guard out front like the medical marijuana places here in LA. Sell easy access to the milk like they do in Venice. $40 gets you a medical marijuana card, dude. Oh, wait. That sounds a lot like Rawesome.
Does this mean that someone deliberately set out to harm you? Hopefully not. Does this mean that you shouldn't seek retribution? Not at all, if you make this decision,this is between you, your lawyer, the farmer and their lawyer and the legal system and that is accepting responsibility for the previous decision. It is taking action for a choice made.
I don't read wapf sites nor do I pay much attention to the govt propaganda sites or to lawyers. Most sites promote their own beliefs and agendas. Research is gathered from numerous areas to make an informed choice of your own beliefs.
My brother took zithromax a few yrs ago, it put him in kidney failure. He hadn't had an antibiotic since he was a young teen, he's pushing 60 now. It was his choice to take the antibiotic. It was given for a simple wound infection on his leg. Now he has no trust and fears "modern medicine" it almost killed him.
Sarah Brady went on a campaign to ban guns. Thus the Brady Bill was initiated. I didn't follow the birth of the Brady Bill, I recall the stories flying that she was trying to ban all guns and that it would be extremely difficult for anyone to get a gun. I don't know what was true and what wasn't. The NRA had the money to fight for whatever concessions came from the finial bills. Amber alert was initiated from the tragedy of the childs lost life.
http://www.cancer(DOT)org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/HerbsVitaminsandMinerals/marijuana
One of the things it is used for is the horrific nausea that occurs from the poison of chemo. Also, many chronic pain patients use it as they can still function mentally while curbing some pain, whereas the RX pain medication clouds the brain and drastically slows reflexes and they have to switch to different meds as the body builds tolerances and the meds don't work, The pot has less side effects.
While I can feel compassion for anyone who got sick from anything, whether it was their fault or not, I am not willing to prohibit people from making their own decisions. I feel a great deal of compassion for all of the obese people in our country who keep consuming products with high fructose corn syrup and soy and canola but I'm not looking to outlaw them–just have them labeled.
Both you and Bill M. have said in the comments of this thread that you support people buying raw milk as long as they pasteurize it. I am sure you're aware that it won't be raw any more but you have found language that plays well with an unknowing public. Because both you and Bill M. have a personal thing against raw milk, neither of your opinions are valid to me.
In my more charitable moments, I can appreciate that both of you are trying to do right by society. Even then, I think you are wasting your time. There are bigger things to do if you want to do something good. This is tiny.
What are her credentials? Does she have any training in science, dietetics, or agriculture?
If she has no qualifications why do we follow the advice of someone who isnt qualified be giving this type of advice in the first place?
How do we know her information is correct? Think about it. We take her word as fact, and people keep getting sick.
We seem to have a big mess on our hands.
When people make their decisions to consume anything, I'd hope they'd consult more than one source.
Barney Google asked:
"How do we know her information is correct? Think about it. We take her word as fact, and people keep getting sick."
What about the people who've been getting or staying well. I've been consuming raw milk for 4-1/2 years and I am still healthy, perhaps healthier than I was, but let's just say "as healthy" for the sake of argument. Where are your data points that count me? What are your qualifications to criticize anyone else's qualifications? Are we not all equally entitled to an opinion?
By the way, I just got Sally's book, "Nourishing Traditions" and it is fabulous! I highly recommend it (using my unqualified opinion).
There is no way of knowing with any great certainty who is correct. However, based on personal experience I would side with the Weston Price Foundation rather then the CDC or the FDA who despite their training in science, dietetics and agriculture make recommendations that are glaringly biased and clearly not in the best interest of those they are supposed to protect.
Ken
David, what is your position on the realmilk website funded by WAPF? Several people have asked WAPF/Sally Fallon to update their information on that website. How has Sally responded?
Sophie, ask yourself why someone dismantles every other "diet dictocrat" and yet she has become one?!?! That was my first red flag.
The pile on her is plain and simple. She does not budge in her position, even though scientific evidence shows her position to be blatantly wrong. She continues to promote raw milk as a panacea and does not acknowledge that there is any inherent danger in drinking it. WAPF and Mark McAfee have funded research which has not gone along with their line of thinking, do they ignore it. They cite research which goes along with their line of thinking, but it is not the whole truth.
Why is WAPF publicist quoted in the AP coverage of this latest raw milk heartache going on at the Shank farm in PA?
http://www.washingtonpostDOTcom/national/health-officials-number-of-sick-from-raw-milk-from-southern-pa-farm-rises-to-35-in-4-states/2012/02/03/gIQAbLaUmQ_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop
How do you think they got HARTKEs contact info? She sure has her talking points down. Just google raw milk and see what comes up first.
Raw milk may be a niche market, Sophie, but sadly it keeps hitting national news because there IS increased demand exactly because of all the misinformation out there on the interwebs and in the overly optimistic health food/natural living communities.
As for myself, I am angry that I took Mark McAfee's word for it, Sally Fallon's word for it, blogger Cheeseslaves word for it, blogger Nourished Kitchen's word for it, blogger Food Renegades word for it. Real Food Media is their parent company which is arguably WAPF best new marketing arm. They all take Sally Fallons word for it and spread her mistruths and reach thousands of viewers each day. Mostly women, and mostly moms like myself.
But as a small farmer I need to use this tragedy as a learning experience and a way to better what I do to protect my family and neighbors. I must admit I was rather naive when I started my dairy farm. My grandfather never had these issues and he hand milked 18 cows in an old barn with railroad ties on the ground for flooring. He didn't have a commercial ice machine and refrigeration, stainless steel sinks, restaurant sanitizing dishwasher, and testing protocols.
He just milk cows with his sons into a bucket and drank the milk and made cheese. I would have to think that in an age of processed foods abound, super antibiotics, and GMO in our food chain this must be changing our immune system or our ability to receive live whole foods. The milk should be cleaner than the days of our forefathers.
So I have many unanswered questions for "Your Family Cow" .
How many cows are they milking?
What is the protocol for cleaning the utter?
What somatic cell count do they allow in their milk and individual cows?
Do they use a bulk tank?
Do they feed silage?
What is the ratio of grass to fodder?
Is it a closed herd?
How do they bottle? glass, plastic, machine?
Is it a herd share or are they a licensed dairy?
Does the family milk the cows or hired hands?
Information is our friend let us use this experience to better our lives and farms.
I really appreciate this website and comment pages, it is a wealth of coruscating information and and it creates a system of checks and balances for our movement.
Wow, free speech and transparency really can make a better world for all of us to live in.
Thank you David and new friends
John Robbins, a vaccine developer with NIH- guess that gives him credentials for food choices for other people.
Joel Fuhrman MD, a family physician, he thinks soy is fine-I disagree. Some of what he says I do agree with. Much of his web site is crap for sale…..as others do. BTW Pouched brains are still eaten in the rest of the world. Do you think that the majority of those who got mad cow disease ate brains? It doesn't matter what part of the cow you eat.
Like other web sites, he twists his words to suit his agenda.
On the Mercola web site he lists ingredients for homemade baby formula.. I can't imagine feeding that to an adult let alone an infant.but I have not researched it either….common sense
http://articles(DOT)mercola(DOT)com/sites/articles/archive/2005/10/11/healthy-alternative-to-conventional-infant-formula-part-1.aspx
Stephen Barrett, M.D-a psychiatrist, retired who went to school in the 1950s–when did they teach nutrition in med school? Oh he got is 3 hour class so he is qualified; he has a list of non-recommeneded sites, Dr Oz, Dr Weil, many others….if he disagrees with you, you appear to be a quack—he believes fluoridation is not poisonous. and that food irradiation is what we need….
It's all about common sense and doing your own research.
What bothers me about these minor outbreaks is that people seem to lose perspective. According to referenced sources in Wikipedia: Foodborne Illness, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foodborne_illness, there were about 800,000+ estimated cases per year of campylobacter foodborne illness in the US from 2000-2007. In the current Family Cow outbreak we have 38 cases identified so far and probably more that have not been reported, but not likely more than 100 or 200 total cases. This is a tiny drop in the bucket. And that's not even considering the estimated 5,000, 000+ cases per year of norovirus, 1,000,000+ cases per year of salmonella, and 900,000+ cases per year of clostridia perfringens foodborne illness in the US alone. Does this tiny risk with raw milk warrant taking away our freedom to choose which food we eat? If so, there are many other much more risky foods that should be prohibited.
A study of 4,486 documented foodborne illness outbreaks involving 138,622 individual cases of illness from 1990-2003, http://cspinet.org/foodsafety/FoodProtTrends.pdf, found that only 153 outbreaks and 5,156 cases (less than 4% of the total) were from any kind of dairy – and most of this was likely from pasteurized dairy. Produce accounted for a much more substantial 554 outbreaks and 28,315 cases (about 20% of the total). Perhaps we should require that all produce should be cooked before being sold? Such is the faulty logic of milk pasteurization. Let people chose which foods to buy and what to do with their food. Eating salad is likely a much greater risk of getting foodborne illness than drinking raw milk. I suspect the same is true of eating out at restaurants. Maybe that should be forbidden too?
And of course the estimated 3,000+ deaths per year from foodborne illness in the US pales in comparison to the approximately 30,000 deaths per year in the US from traffic accidents. Maybe we should ban cars too? It all boils down to what is the acceptable risk and our freedom to make decisions involving risk.
I agree with others that in regard to food, what we need is proper and accurate labeling so that people can make their own informed decisions. Raw milk should be labeled as such. If it is required to have a disclaimer regarding health risk, then just about every other food should also have a similar disclaimer, indicating the estimated risk of illness based on actual statistics. Many foods would likely have to list a much higher risk than raw milk. How about a salad and some raw oysters anyone? 🙂
Has anyone here studied the entire body of medical literature to determine whether Sally Fallon and the WAPF have told us the whole truth regarding the benefits and risks of raw milk, or if they have cherry picked information that best fits their already-established position? If we dont get our information from WAPF regarding the benefits of raw milk, where does it come from? What research did we do, where did we look, who told it to us? Did we read the studies WAPF provides to back up their claims, or just take their word for it?
Is it possible we in the raw milk movement have found a truth we believe in so we stop asking questions, and instead spend our time defending the worldview weve created from that truth?
Some food for thought
Dr. Cat Berge, DVM, PH.D, who sits on the board of RAWMI, stated, "I do not buy into many of the health arguments raised for raw milk…" Now, the question is, do we want to know why, or not?
This is what all entities appear to do, whether it is wapf or the govt or the medical establishment, or big pharm or big ag…. common practice. Is it right? No, it just is what it is.
"regarding the benefits of raw milk, where does it come from?"
Internet, other people, libraries, medical libraries, even the govt sites….you have to take responsibility for your own research.
"Did we read the studies WAPF provides "
I didn't. I glanced over the web site, some I agreed with some I did not, just as with the govt sites. I do have the cookbook, I find numerous recipes I like. Just like any other cookbook, I don't use all the recipes in it.
Everyone has their own version of what their truth is. Are they right or wrong? For them they are right. Questions should never stopped being asked. Learning is an ongoing part of life.
As for Dr Berge, you'll have to ask her why, no one can speak for her or anyone else.
I did not buy a cow because Sally Fallon said I should. I didn't know what WAPF was or who SF was when I started drinking raw milk. After a friend of mine spiraled into a deep depression and successfully took her own life, I decided to opt out of the industrialized food/drug circles. I was looking for a whole food diet and my local farm's milk was one piece to the puzzle.
I have, since owning a cow, found Dave Milano's observations (comments in the last post) to be very true. There is something to the animal in close proximity to you and immunity. My youngest son has immune issues and we see him have the most issues during the cow's "dry" period (the timeframe in which you do not milk her as she prepares for the birth of her calf).
Another thing that I have found is that 100% grassfed, when dealing with modern dairy genetics, is a VERY hard thing to accomplish. I used to be that customer that questioned why my farmer fed grain to the cows (probably because I had found the WAPF website by that time). Now, I am a milkmaid who tries my darndest to keep condition on my cow as she pours milk into the bucket each day. I don't know if SF/WAP will change their stance on 100% grassfed now that Sally has her own herd of Jersey cows (grain-fed at milking time from what I have read) and is making raw milk cheese on her Maryland farm.
Kristen/Barney-I hear you on the "who's who" and "the questioning game". I don't know how it all inter-relates and I don't care much. I think that I would care more if I was a consumer looking for quality dairy products, though. This is the only blog that I subscribe to and the only one that I follow on a regular basis. I find that if you get too carried away on the internet, it can suck your life away. I am way too busy for that.
I will continue to pray for The Shank's. I can't imagine the nightmare they are living.
I ve listened to a great deal of the whys and why nots and will continue to listen as long as the debate rages or until I am dead, which ever comes first.
Ive been milking cows and consuming raw milk for over fifty years. Some of the people who purchased raw milk from me over the course of those years have claimed health benefits and based on the knowledge that Ive acquired through education and experience I believe them.
On the other hand the industry and government has attempted to convince the public that there is no difference between pasteurized milk and raw milk. I know that they know that they are deliberately lying to the public and claiming that science is on their side to boot.
You cant take a gallon of pasteurized milk and set it beside the wood cook stove and leave it there for twenty-four hours and expect to use it. Pasteurized milk is a dead mass of toxic organisms and it will rot. Raw milk on the other hand is teaming with living organisms and if left in a warm place will culture. If you then take this cultured milk and heat it on the stove you will end up with a bowl of fresh cheese that you can use on pizza, salad or whatever.
We have discussed on this blog at lib the differences between the two milks and as far as I am concerned there is no convincing one side or the other. The battle will continue to rage on, its an age-old battle between those that have a desire to control and those who desire to be free. The knowledge that has been accumulated to date is not adequate to resolve the issue.
Ken
I've lived on just raw milk for periods of over 100 days at a time, consuming about 1/2 of my body weight in raw milk per week. When I do this, I THRIVE!
I've met others who have the same experience with raw milk – they've chosen to live+thrive on it for weeks, months, and in some cases, years.
I've yet to hear of anyone doing this on "nutritionally equivalent" pasteurized milk.
When I substitute even 1/2 gallon of pasteurized milk per day into my diet, I feel crummy. I doubt I would live long if I tried to live exclusively on pasteurized milk. I welcome someone showing me that it can be done.
In the meantime, I'll keep thriving on my chosen diet of over 90% raw milk (by weight), and when I want to really thrive (at the expense of social eating) I'll go to 100% raw milk.
I also think there is a huge difference between CAFO pasteurized milk purchased at the grocery store and buying raw milk from your local farmer and pasteurizing it yourself at home.
Mary, home pasteurization is an option for those whod like to exercise it, if you can find a farmer willing to sell you raw milk. Its possible to buy home pasteurizers, but theyre quite spendy. Heres one:
http://www.lehmans.com/store/Kitchen___The_Home_Dairy___Other_Supplies___Home_Milk_Pasteurizers___P3000#P3000P3000A
Another option is to create a double boiler out of two stock pots, while using a thermometer to check the temperature. My wife uses this method when making cheese, and found it easy to do with things she already owned.
(Before anyone thinks I should be criticized for talking about home pasteurization with Mary, remember that if you believe you should have the right to buy and consume raw milk, if thats your choice, you also agree that others have the right to pasteurize their milk at home, if thats their choice.)
Out of curiosity, could you tell a difference in the flavor of the milk after you pasteurized it? Was it changed all that dramatically?
Mary, I have a couple of questions for you, and hope you will answer truthfully:
Do you feed your family any raw vegetables, or fast food? What is your opinion on GMO foods, and what do you consider the risk to be in any food you do consume, raw or not? Do you boil all the water you drink? Is there a risk-free food? Maybe I should be asking Mr. Marler. What can you eat these days and not sue for your decision to having eaten it? Dieing to know.
/sarcasm on/ … This from someone who seems dead set on outlawing raw milk availability or allowing personal decision making on the subject. Do you favor GMO labeling, or is that a lot safer than raw milk so therefore we don't need or want to know? / sarcasm off/
And yes, I have got seafood poisoning and it's horrible, but I didn't think it was the fisherman's fault.
If you met me Ora and witnessed a day with me in the kitchen cooking for my family or went grocery shopping with you, you would know I am quite concerned about the state of the food system in the US. That is how I got sucked into trying raw milk in the first place.
Here, I will give you a clue. My son has never drank a soda, or eaten at a fast food restaurant, and only eats the food I prepare for him.
Here, Ill give you another clue. Packaged leafy greens sold in the grocery store and sprouts are as high risk as raw milk. Both should carry a safety warning label.
The FDA top ten most risky foods in America does not include raw milk. It does include ice-cream and pasteurized cheese.
I take total exception to all of those that deny that there not verifiable medical benefits associated directly with the consumption of raw milk.
They are : relief of Asthma, bone density improvement, IBS relief, immunity improvement ( IGg levels ), rare lactose intolerance,CRP decrease. Less frequent colds!!
There is science Gabriela Parsifal etc….and a huge number of consumer testimonials behind each of these claims. The truth is so inconvenient.
Oh, that's just a wild guess based on the small, slightly indistinguishable fact that everything you post in this forum is always about warning everyone that they or their kids could die, or come close to it by drinking raw milk.
Maybe we shouldn't eat at all, it's too dangerous.
Barney raises very valid questions. I can honestly say that I had never heard of WAPF when I began researching raw milk. In all honestly, I don't recall what started my interest. I did a lot of searching, and researching if you will, to see what I could find. My grandfather was raised on a dairy farm (always drank raw milk, and he actually preferred it as warm as possible straight from the cow) and always lamented what had happened to milk, even though he had chosen to leave the farm and pursue other opportunities. I remember talking him with him about the cows and the farm. I was lucky to find a source close to me for raw milk.
I have pasteurized milk, when making cheese, and agree that it doesn't take an extra kitchen machine; it's likely it can be accomplished with current kitchen implements.
But as has been said, this is about choice, and if you want to get fresh milk, you should be able to. Whether or not you choose to pasteurize it is one's own choice. I have never thought that consuming raw milk was without risk, but perhaps that is part of my personal experience. My mother is a chemist by education and worked for the state lab of hygiene for years; I have had pathology drilled into me. I get it, and I understand the risk, and it's my choice. I've also decided that opting out of the industrial, impersonal system is what I want. I have the ability to go to my farmer directly, and speak to him. Only recently have I found a reliable source of organic, vat-pasteurized, non-homogenized milk and it's more than twice what I pay per gallon (and I don't have the opportunity to speak to him). I'm not opposed to paying for what I perceive as quality, but as long as I can get it fresh from the farm and do with it what I please, that's what I will do.
Mary, I will say that I absolutely can tell the difference in the taste of fresh versus pasteurized milk. I admit that I have a sensitive olfactory, and that contributes to my sensitive taste. I have, however, done a couple of blind taste testings to test myself. It's always clear to me what has been pasteurized, because even if vat-pasteurized, it tastes cooked. Have I felt any health benefits? Well, I can't say for sure that raw milk has made a difference in my health, but I do know it's the only change in diet I've made in the past five years.
These are some of the thoughts and conclusions of the authors of the study:
The beneficial influence of growing up on a farm against sensitization and development of allergic diseases in childhood has earlier been reported in studies from Austria, Canada, Finland, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. The farming environment appeared to provide more consistent protection against rhinoconjunctivitis and sensitization than against asthma and other atopic diseases, and this was confirmed by our study. Farm children are more exposed to micro-organisms related to livestock animals, which has been proposed to protect against developing sensitization and allergic diseases. In addition, long-term and early life exposure to stables and farm milk has been shown to protect against the development of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis and atopic sensitisation.
The lifestyle of children in anthroposophic families differs with respect to several characteristics that may be of importance for allergy, e.g. restrictive use of antibiotics, antipyretics and certain vaccinations, as well as dietary habits including intake of fermented vegetables and biodynamic food. The prevalence of allergic diseases, but not atopic sensitization, was slightly lower in the farm reference group than in the Steiner children group. This could possibly be explained by the fact that most of the Steiner schools were in urban/suburban areas and the farm reference group in a rural setting, as earlier studies have shown a lower prevalence of allergic diseases in rural than in urban areas.
There is most probably no single factor in the farm and/or anthroposophic environment that prevents children from developing allergic diseases; but rather that the effects result from a complex interplay between various environmental and life style factors.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00939.x/full
It seems that the authors are attributing a rural lifestyle in general, and a farm lifestyle specifically, to the protection against allergies, asthma and eczema, while also noting that the lifestyle habits of those that follow anthroposophy (no vaccinations, etc.) offer these same protections, albeit on a slightly smaller scale. I do not see where they attribute the same protective factors to raw milk *specifically* (and to the exclusion of rural/farm lifestyle). Can someone shed some light on this for me?
Mark has mentioned the Parsifal study several times on this blog as a study that positively correlates raw milk with health-enhancing benefits. I'm looking at the Parsifal study on Google Scholar and am having trouble seeing where the authors make this claim, so Im hoping someone here can help me out.
These are some of the thoughts and conclusions of the authors of the study:
The beneficial influence of growing up on a farm against sensitization and development of allergic diseases in childhood has earlier been reported in studies from Austria, Canada, Finland, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. The farming environment appeared to provide more consistent protection against rhinoconjunctivitis and sensitization than against asthma and other atopic diseases, and this was confirmed by our study. Farm children are more exposed to micro-organisms related to livestock animals, which has been proposed to protect against developing sensitization and allergic diseases. In addition, long-term and early life exposure to stables and farm milk has been shown to protect against the development of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis and atopic sensitisation.
The lifestyle of children in anthroposophic families differs with respect to several characteristics that may be of importance for allergy, e.g. restrictive use of antibiotics, antipyretics and certain vaccinations, as well as dietary habits including intake of fermented vegetables and biodynamic food. The prevalence of allergic diseases, but not atopic sensitization, was slightly lower in the farm reference group than in the Steiner children group. This could possibly be explained by the fact that most of the Steiner schools were in urban/suburban areas and the farm reference group in a rural setting, as earlier studies have shown a lower prevalence of allergic diseases in rural than in urban areas.
There is most probably no single factor in the farm and/or anthroposophic environment that prevents children from developing allergic diseases; but rather that the effects result from a complex interplay between various environmental and life style factors.
It seems that the authors are attributing a rural lifestyle in general, and a farm lifestyle specifically, to the protection against allergies, asthma and eczema, while also noting that the lifestyle habits of those that follow anthroposophy (no vaccinations, etc.) offer these same protections, albeit on a slightly smaller scale. I do not see where they attribute the same protective factors to raw milk *specifically* (and to the exclusion of a rural/farm lifestyle). Can someone shed some light on this for me?
https://docs(DOT) google(DOT) com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:DIeRCIhVALcJ:www.organicpastures.com/pdfs/raw_milk_allergy.pdf+PARSIFAL+study+raw+milk&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiufoCiSa6b3y14BiscB0nDVVnx_k1C6YOeTVRCL2VJ_XFgIx6DIFVJpMMQQW39z4cCwIJUeE9fyHS1WLnlJ0zgLQj-PuRtXPJ-ucO6CfeU5L0R8lM9TxDCmW7NNA9oj-ylkHV9&sig=AHIEtbRj8gLtUXcVduWaMKiB4Kd5wUdi5A
Per this study it "confirms" an inverse association between farm milk and decreased asthma and it used the parsifal study. This is the link from OP web site.
I have not yet read the entire study. So far from the study: ." In addition, long-term and early life exposure to stables and farm milk has been shown to protect against the development of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis and atopic sensitisation (13)."
I personally think they have better immunity as they are exposed to more varied bacterias.
long-term and early life exposure to stables and farm milk
has been shown to protect against the development of
asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis and atopic sensitisation (13)."
I think the above is an hypothesis and further studying should be done to confirm the consumption of raw dairy and decrease in asthma to give a definitive correlation. As I said, the greater exposure to the natural environment, the stronger your immune system becomes. The study even states: "effects result from a complex interplay between
various environmental and life style factors."
http://www.ncbi(DOT) nlm(DOT) nih(DOT) gov/pubmed/6547669
"These results demonstrate that during food and caloric deprivation, the lung quickly adapts to maintain the quality and quantity of surfactant on the alveolar surface."
http://books (DOT) google(DOT) com/books?id=zLniRalmWuoC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=nutrients+for+lung+surfactant&source=bl&ots=GxNMMK2ip7&sig=jWuH-GqLcwbodNvpCIARoAZdJx4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wC0wT_z2Dumy2QXhmcnpDg&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=nutrients%20for%20lung%20surfactant&f=false
page 271.
Two things stuck out.
1. The authors of the study compared children who drank farm milk to children who drank store bought milk. Children who did not drink milk were purposefully excluded from this survey, even if they lived on farms. (The authors claim this exclusion made no impact on their conclusions, however.)
2. The authors state, About half of the parents indicated that they usually did not boil the milk before consumption but no differential effects were observed between those boiling and not boiling the milk. This might be a result of biased parental answers or may indicate that pasteurization is not of key importance because compounds other than microbes may play a role. They then go on to hypothesize that its the higher omega 3 content in farm milk that offers the allergenic protections, as this has been observed in other studies.
They also state, Future analyses of the farm milk components responsible for the beneficial effect therefore have to include fatty acid profiles in addition to microbial compounds.
One wonders if there could be a case made for purchasing milk from a farm and then home pasteurizing as Mary Martin has suggested, for those who would want to avoid possible pathogenic contamination.
Itll be interesting to see what further studies say, and Id be curious to see one that compares farm children who drink raw milk to farm children who drink no milk, as to better determine whether its the milk or the farm environment that offers the protection, as that data was unavailable in this study.
I can't speak for others, it seems if you want to boil your milk, that is your choice, just as if you don't want to boil it, then don't. A non issue to me.
More studies would be interesting to find more definitive conclusions. So far, they appear to be very broad.
I thankfully did not give any of the tainted milk to my grandchildren who I baby sat that day. Their young metabolism may not have been able to fight off this horrible infection. I am still not fully recovered but thankfully am getting better! I now worry about the possible complications down the road, but that is a concern for another day. All the science talk about how to clean this or that is all fine and good for future avoidance of such errors. But I have never been so ill as I was that week and a half. I do not have the time nor patience to read all the commentary above. All I can ask is "What about the victims?"