A growing number of people prefer raw milk (unpasteurized milk), considering it not only safe but healthier than pasteurized milk because it is still rich in pro-biotics not killed off by pasteurization. l
Farming communities have consumed raw milk for generations. The exchange between farmers and neighbors play a central part in the web of relations sustaining those communities. Yet raw milk is banned in many states.
Corporate milk: Dairy farmers sell their milk to milk "producers" who pasteurize it, may add things to it, bottle it, distribute it, often at great distances. Dairy farmers must accept a price set by others, in a large competitive market. Nothing in the process promotes local farming communities.
"...The system of influence and control..is highly skewed in favor of the corporate and financial system." - Vincente Navarro, (Professor of Health and Social Policy, John Hopkins U.).
2. HEALTH
Raw milk:
"[For years, m]illions [in California] consumed commercial raw milk, ... not a single incidence was reported. During the same period, there were many instances of contamination in pasteurized milk, some of which resulted in death. [I]f we withdrew ... every food type responsible for a case of food poisoning, there would be virtually nothing left to eat. But only raw milk has been singled out for general removal from the food supply.
"... the bacteria in raw milk is the healthy bacteria of lactic-acid fermentation while the bacteria in pasteurized milk is the bacteria of spoilage. ... Both raw and pasteurized milk contain E. coli, normally a benign microorganism. The most likely source of the new strains of virulent E. coli is genetically engineered soy, fed to cows in large commercial dairies. If there is any type of milk likely to harbor these virulent breeds, it is commercial pasteurized milk. ... Children fed raw milk have more resistance to TB, scurvy, flu, diphtheria, pneumonia, asthma, allergic skin problems and tooth decay. In addition, their growth and calcium absorption was superior." (In California, there is currently an effort to ban raw milk.
"Four distinct groups of bacteria survive pasteurization....the strep of pasteurized milk are the most frequent cause of rheumatic fever --the most deadly disease of childhood.'" - USDA
Corporate milk:
During the Clinton administration, a new study was released "conclud[ing] that milk from cows injected with [genetically engineered bovine growth hormone - rBGH) increases risks of breast and colon cancers in humans.
....
"rBGH poses an even greater risk to human health than ever considered," warned Samuel Epstein M.D., Professor of Environmental Medicine .... "The FDA and Monsanto have a lot to answer for. Given the cancer risks, and other health concerns, why is rBGH milk still on the market?"
Since 1986, independent scientists have expressed concern about the lack of research on rBGH milk.
Michael Colby, Executive Director of Food and Water said, "Monsanto 's claims that rBGH is perfectly safe have been proven dead wrong today .... Only Monsanto is benefiting from this drug. It's time for dairy companies to side with consumers by adopting a policy that they will not allow rBGH, under any circumstances, to be used by their farmers."
Epstein said: "The entire nation is currently being subjected to a large-scale adulteration of an age-old dietary staple by a poorly characterized and unlabeled biotechnology product which is very different than natural milk."
In 2007 - when Mark Nolt was first arrested for selling raw milk (natural milk) - a citizens' petition to the FDA on rBGH milk showed 30 scientific journals indicating an up-to-7-fold increased risk of breast cancer, and an increased risk of colon and prostate cancern.
3. PROMOTION
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
