If you don't want to drink it, that's fine. But don't hide behind a mask of goodwill while pushing your own opinions off onto others. That makes you no different than people who protest funerals. Different agenda, same ultra-controlling mindset. Confine your control issues to yourself.
and if u think the food on our shelves are safe, think again...... for example, some continental meals, stocks, etc have a chemical in it called "635" which is banned in Australia... why is it still on our shelves? isnt that enough evidence that the food safety people arent doing their job????
Its worse than that. Many food additives are drugs defined as foods. MSG, Aspartame, Saccharin, the list goes on. As they are classified as foods the rules for approval are less strict. Many have not been in wide use for more than a generation and they are rarely if ever tested in combination.
In short we are in the middle of a massive clinical trial where it is almost impossible to tie down cause and effect. It is made worse by the lax labelling rules.
@Heidipie1234 The FDA allowed the biotech industry to genetically engineer a tomato with a fish and release it into the population with no testing even required. Does any one else think that this is absolutely insane? What happened to the precautionary principle? Well I don't need an FDA approval for raw milk because people througout Europe, Africa and Asia have been drinking it (and thriving on it) for over 10,000 years! It has stood the test of time!
raw milk is far safer than pasterised milk... because raw milk has the good digestion bacteria and the enzimes it protects u from viruses and deseases... whether as the pasterised milk, the bacteria and the enzimes are destroyed which means the milk has more of a chance of being contaminated with dangerous bacteria......
your critique of raw milk could easily be applied to the produce industry. Numerous outbreaks of e-coli and other infectious diseases have been reported over the years in the raw vegetables (the most recent being the cantaloupe melon). Does that mean we should stop eating raw fruits and vegetables? No more salads?
If raw milk is soooo dangerous, then why are there hundreds of raw milk vending machines in Italy? Here's a statistic that really jumps out at me ConC0rdance; in the past 11 years no person has died from raw milk. This year alone 76 people died from eating cantaloupe. The FDA is corrupt, incompetent and incapable of protecting you. Don't be brainwashed by them.
Can you provide raw data for these raw milk related outbreaks? When the headline information is carefully examined, cases have been found where the reasoning used to assign blame to raw milk has been far from rigorous.
Nothing the CDC publishes is peer reviewed. Evidence of filtering during the investigation of outbreaks has also been seen "E.g. sick people asked if they drank raw milk" if yes, they are included in the data, if not they are sent home.
What about the quantity of milk the people actually drink? You seem to assume that everybody are equal regarding the risk of the milk and that everyone drink the same quantity of milk. If somebody actually choses to drink raw milk, couldn't you suppose that he would be a more regular drinker than many other people? What about how sensible people are to milk? We know that many people are more sensible to milk (gastric problems and stuff) than other, wouldn't that matter in your figures?
This year 76 people died from eating cantaloupe. FDA approved drug Vioxx killed an estimated 55,000 people before it was recalled in 2004. Can you imagine their weeping families C0nc0rdance? How many people have died from drinking raw milk in the past 11 years? None, the two deaths cited by this video are from raw cheese not raw milk. How's that for putting things in perspective C0nc0rdance?
question, when these producers of raw milk have a contaminated product, what bacteria tend to be the culprits most of the time? More specifically are there any group E escherichia-coli found? from what i understand 0157:H7 tends to be responsible for many cases of HUS.
concordance i think you should have mentioned one of the serious complications from listeria monocytogenes, listeric meningitis. these science-denier-alt-med-hipsters think of stomach pains and missing a day of work when thinking of 'food born illness'.
Good point... I was thinking only of hemolytic urinary syndrome, but Listeric meningitis can be transmitted by food or water. I'm not sure if there are any cases in the literature.
People forget how often kids, the elderly or pregnant moms are the ones being harmed by dangerous practices like this.
You seem to have lost all the good research you did. I would love to read the papers you found that showed that there are no nutritional benefits to raw milk. I feel I must point out that the test for successful pasteurisation is the destruction of the enzyme phosphatase, which is needed to absorb calcium from milk. I would say that alone is a huge nutritional difference. So how about some citations?
That's a sharp question. Cows are ruminants, which means they have a very different set of microbiota in their gut. Antibodies are species specific, what constitutes passive immunization for a calf would represent a foreign protein antigen to you.
@TheRtlillico Oh my god, there is a 1 in 150,000 chance that the raw milk Queen Elizabeth gave to Prince Harry and Price William will make them sick!!! SOMEBODY PUT THIS WOMAN IN JAIL!!!!!!!!
This is such bullshit! The microorganisms in "raw milk" are great for your body. Nasty mega produced store bought milk is terrible for you - your body can't digest it. I'll take my chances with healthy grass fed cows. Thanks for the propaganda, but it doesn't work on me.
@saraanneburrows non raw milk from stores can come from healthy grass fed cows too. Just look for 'biological products' or 'free range' or something. Raw or not says nothing about how the cows were reared. It's only about the treatment of the milk after milking. Have you even watched the entire video, because all this was mentioned. It was even said in the video that milk from free range cows is less risky than mass produced milk from megafarms. Have you been paying attention? Guess not.
when i'll have time (after my exam in two weeks) I'll check myself the stats because the way you presented this makes me suspect you allready had made your opinion first and then set out to find numbers to support it. don't take it personnaly, if you are unbiased i shall reach the same conclusion.
Well in france where i live, a lot of our cheese are raw milk (and i personnaly think the taste variety is worth the risk), but i've never heard anyone mentionned us having more or less dairy related accident than in the us where raw milk is less common.
C0nc0rdance, at 9:52, you give figures on the number of raw and pasteurized milk outbreaks. I am interested to know where you got this data from? I would also like to know how many people got sick from pasteurized milk, not just the number of outbreaks.
I'm sorry to say that the source material for this video was wiped out with my computer crash. I think it was a 2005 MMWR article, but I don't have the full citation for you, sorry. You can go to the CDC Raw Milk Q&A page, and it has summaries of research work on the topic. I'll quote a short section for you here:
"Among dairy product-associated outbreaks reported to CDC between 1973 and 2009 in which the investigators reported whether the product was pasteurized or raw, 82% were due to raw milk or cheese. From 1998 through 2009, 93 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,837 illnesses, 195 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths."
"among the 93 raw dairy product outbreaks from 1998 to 2009, 79% involved at least one person less than 20 years old."
ibid. "Although precise data are not available, it is thought that less than 1% of milk sold to consumers in the United States has not been pasteurized."
I will concede that the FoodSafetyNet article you cited suggests a slightly higher figure... somewhere between 2.1 and 3.3%, although I suspect that I'm not comparing properly... 1% sold, but 3% consumed might suggest that there are homes where milk is not consumed at all?
@C0nc0rdance, 1% sold and 3% consumed may be explained by raw milk propagation by means other than sale, i.e. gifts, sharing, or even the dairy farmer's themselves. If I produced a food product myself, you probably wouldn't find me shopping for it somewhere else.
I grew up on a diary farm. I've had my share of raw milk. It is indeed quite good, but not something you just want to gorge yourself on...
Like c0nc0rdance said. Cows are not clean, and most farms don't clean the milk-extraction nozzel thingies from cow to cow. Unless they drop it in shit. Usually a farm only has about twenty or so of these nozzels per 100 animals, and they just go down the line with them.
O.K. The population of America is 607 million and the % of people that drink raw milk is around 3.04. Therefore the number of people that drink raw milk is 0.0304*607e6=9.66 million. According to the CDC, an average of 61 people get sick from raw milk per year (personally I believe this is less). Therefore the percentage of those RM drinkers that get sick is (61/9.66e6)*100=0.00065%. That's a risk I'm willing to take, especially since no one has died in the past 11 years from drinking raw milk.
3:36 - Many of these cases were a result of cows living in confined conditions and being fed swill from nearby liquor distillies. This was found in many large cities such as NY, Philly, and Boston. If you feed an animal poor food, it's going to yield a poor product. Maybe even a lethal product. Although your fish friend is a special case, hehe. One could experiment in a garden. Have a section of poor soil quality and a section of rich, nutrient dense soil. Which lettuce will taste better?
"From 1998 through 2008, 86 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,676 illnesses, 191 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with raw milk likely is greater. "
@C0nc0rdance After being threatened with a FOIA by Mark McAfee, (owner of Organic Pastures Dairy) the CDC admitted that one of the "raw milk" deaths was actually linked to illegal raw queso fresco cheese. The agency has not yet provided details about the other death, but it is likely that it, too, was linked to some adulterated raw milk product rather than to raw milk itself. In 2006 alone, there were at least 1,300 people who got sick from pasteurized milk just in California (NaturalNewsdotcom)
Yes, and in 2006, in California alone, (from a single outbreak) there were 47 cases of illness from raw milk. There are 100 pasteurized milk drinkers for every raw milk drinker... so the proper comparison would be 13 cases of pasteurized milk illnesses vs. 47 raw milk illnesses. Almost 4 fold higher rate of disease.
If you expand it to the whole country, over the last decade, raw milk is responsible for 25% of disease, but only 1% of consumption. It is a much higher risk.
@C0nc0rdance Actually, according to a very large telephone survey by FoodNet carried out in 2007, 3.04% of the population drinks raw milk. You can't base the safety of raw milk for the whole country on two Californian outbreaks. Lets put this in perspective; According to the CDC in the past 13 years an average of 61 people per year have become sick from raw milk. Conversely, all other foods account for over 100,000 people being hospitalized per year and 3,000 dying (Mercola dot com).
Are you 100 times better off jumping out of an airplane than not? Or is the rate of exposure important when comparing the number of times and the number of people exposed? Do more people eat spinach or raw milk? Hamburgers or raw milk?
@C0nc0rdance BTW, since you're so fond of your base jumping analogies; if I have the right to risk my life base jumping, then why shouldn't I have the right to take the miniscule risk of drinking raw milk? I think you know the answer and it has nothing to do with food safety.
Actually, BASE jumping is illegal in most places, mostly for insurance reasons. You can't jump in any federal park land, and you must get permission from the owner of the building or you're trespassing, and subject to arrest. No business owner is likely to grant you permission given the liability they would assume.
@TheRtlillico Drinking base jumpers is almost always personal choise, exposing a child to raw milk is not their personal choise and not a risk people should be taking 'for' them.
I have 3 arguments why parents should have the right to feed their kids raw milk: 1. It has been shown that when babies are fed a diet that consists solely of pasteurized milk they develop infantile scurvy. 2. With 0.00065% of raw milk drinkers getting sick from raw milk per year, it's not exactly playing Russian Roulette with your children's health. 3. It's traditional; I grew up on raw milk, so did my parents, so did their parents and so did every single generation in my family.
@gleehmee Lets talk about the accuracy of my "slanted statistic". The number of people who drink raw milk has been determined from an extensive FoodNet service, C0nCordance will tell you it is valid. The number of people who have become sick from the years 2000 to 2008 has been given as 27 cases per year according to a peer reviewed paper by P. Oliver. The data C0nCordance has used is actually for raw milk and cheese made from raw milk and this is a milk debate only, so his data doesn't count.
@TheRtlillico so on the one hand you use C0nc0rdance as an authority for one side and then identify him as not an authority on the other hand? Consistency please.
The statistic, as with any statistic, is limited to the area and size of the test group and came from, it indicates something, it does not state it as a general rule.
As the other 2 points did not stand, the middle point is unsupported further limiting how informative the post really is.
@gleehmee If you are going to accept C0nc0rdances data then, (in the case of the population that drinks raw milk) you also have to accept mine, because they come from the same place, the CDC. The point that I made in my last post is valid, this is a raw milk debate and C0nc0rdance has used data for both raw milk and cheese made from raw milk and so it cannot be used. The data I have used for the number of sicknesses is peer reviewed, so if that isn't good enough for you then what is?
You're also assuming I'm accepting C0ncordance's data, and upon that, that I'm accepting it for no good reason. As to my previous comment on the reliability of statistics, any statatistics taken from this direction, on their own they mean only what they say about the group they themselves were taken from, the general point I took from the video is the important part, to which the specific statistic supports but is not the heart of the matter.
@gleehmee Point taken, there are many studies that contradict one another and statistics can vary considerably. So what specific part of the video lead you to conclude that raw milk is so dangerous? Was it the part about the Mexicans?
@TheRtlillico Not 'dangerous. just 'more dangerous'.
It wasn't the video that convinced me, it's just somehting I've learned over time.
However, it is not something I would give to children, when there is an alternative that is shown to be safer, if you are going with statistics. That 1%vs99%:56%vs44% statistic explains the reason for my position on this matter quiet well, if we're going with statistics.
The fact that this video overlooks is that raw milk drinkers are informed consumers. They probably know more about raw milk than most pasteurised milk drinkers know about what they drink. I know who produces my milk, does he?
If raw milk was so bad, we, the raw milk drinkers would shut down the dairies ourselves by not buying it. The fact that despite a multi-million dollar propaganda and lobbying campaign, that has not happened, should tell the the outsider to investigate why.
People always resort to Latin when they run out of ideas.
1. Base jumping is dangerous, people understand and do it anyway.
2. Blood letting is like chemotherapy, sometimes it worked, often it did not, plenty of science behind chemo.
The simple fact is you say raw milk is risky, and yet people who take that risk don't stop. Either they are getting sick all the time and persisting, or they don't and you are wrong.
Thousands of years of raw milk consumption suggest you are wrong
Just a little anecdote since you brought up blood letting. Leeches were a popular therapy in antiquity. Then Western science gave it the thumbs down as barbaric. Then research revealed it was a sound medical technique and now you can get leeched by your very own board certified doctor.
What next, maggots is wounds ?? Antibacterial fungus treatments?? They all started way before science came along, sometimes observation and honesty is enough.
The best advice is to realise that there are two kinds of raw milk.
1. Raw milk intended for pasteurisation (99% of milk produced)
2.Raw milk intended for human consumption.
I advocate drinking type 2 only, from certified dairies. Uncertified raw milk is like eating road kill. If road kill makes you sick, you don't close down reputable butchers.
There is no substitute for first hand experience. Raw milk kills pathogens, and the scaremongering done here can safely be ignored after due diligence
If raw milk kills pathogens, why is it responsible for 20 times the number of cases of illness and hospitalization as pasteurized? Wouldn't it be responsible for zero illnesses?
The fact you have admitted pasteurisation causes sickness answers your own question. Even heat damaging milk is not 100% efficient.
As for outbreak stats you keep quoting, close examination of specific cases reveals, bias, mis-reporting and some quite lazy evidence gathering. Further, the statistics don't separate certified and un-certified sources.
If I got a bad burger at a garden barbecue, it is not the same as getting it from Macdonald's, unless you ask the CDC.
This is the "conspiracy fallacy", and it's very popular here on YouTube. You've found a way to dismiss all evidence that doesn't line up with your preconceived notions, so you can never be wrong. We call this in science an "unfalsifiable hypothesis".
Some might say that disease outbreaks at certified raw milk dairies put the lie to your assertion: "Raw milk kills pathogens", but I know that's something you could never admit.
Science is what happens in the physical world, we can all do it to some extent. The Literature is what is allowed to be recorded. It is only as good as the system of validation. When the people in that system are funded by interests who have a stake in what they say, the results must be viewed in that light.
Sorry, I think science is cool, but I am not blind to the role of politics and corruption as you seem to be.
The Author of this video is on a mission to spread ignorance. He states he would not risk drinking raw milk. Great, so why try to lecture those of use who have forgotten more than he will ever know on the subject.
I have never eaten Oysters, don't know what they taste like or what they would do to me. I know if they go bad I could get sick.
But no matter how many peer reviewed papers I read, I will still be ignorant until I try eating some, and nothing will change that.
I have never injected heroin, either, but I feel pretty confident presenting reasons you might not want to do so.
Really, this is such a silly argument I can't bring myself to take it seriously. Have you ever dripped vinegar into your eyes? How do you know it isn't awesome until you try it?
So how did you get started drinking water, eating food, using a computer, tying your shoes, having sex. I could go on but I hope you can figure out where this is going. It is called "Trial and error" outside the Ivory tower where you seem to want to imprison humanity, that is how people figure things out. Look it up!
Are you saying your method for determining if a water source is safe is to drink from it? Trial and error doesn't work so well when the consequences are hospitalization.
Have you tried putting vinegar in your eye yet? It's totally rad, all the cool kids are doing it.
We are talking about certified organic raw milk. Labs do a great job checking it for pathogens. Millions of servings have been certified pathogen free in California that way. All the cool states are doing it.
1. Humans live in symbiosis with the bacteria in our food. Bacteria help us to digest our food, protect ourselves from pathogens and manufacture vitamins.
2. The best source of of bacteria is from our environment, as this source is proven over many generations to work.
3. The comment about cow fecal bacteria showed your ignorance. The same bacteria live in other places, like cabbage, where they make sauerkraut. So we could call them cabbage bacteria.
1. We live in symbiosis with our natural flora, which does NOT come from contaminated food.
2. The environment contains pathogens and commensals. Randomly eating dirty things is not a safe way to introduce bacteria to your gut. Don't lick cows, please.
3. Fecal coliforms, when present in fermented products, result in spoilage. That's why cleaning the jars and sterilizing them (similar to pasteurizing) is so important. Otherwise you get sick.
1. Sorry to disappoint you, but the pro-biotics that you probably quaff down because they are safe, are found naturally in food. You can pickle cabbage without adding any starter culture because it is present in the cabbage.
2. Sauerkraut, Youhurt, raw milk and other fermented foods are natural probiotics. So no need to lick any animal, just turn off the heater.
3. Some animals like elephants get essential flora from fecal material.
@C0nc0rdance - You might boil jars if your pickling. I personally don't when I'm fermenting.
You should try some of the fermented dishes in Nourishing Traditions! Very tasty, benefits your poop, and helps digestion with cooked food! I'm a big fan of the beet kvass recipe! Plus I enjoy making kefir with goats milk.
@C0nc0rdance - If you are curious about fermentation at all, Sandor Ellix Katz is worth mentioning. I'm not sure what his education specs are, but I do know he's been fermenting for 17 years. He's got some youtube vid's too.
I had a long thoughtful response then it didnt post UGH! main points: Enzymes are needed for basic 'chemical reactions' in the body. Something most are missing out on and don't realize it. Did you know raw milk has an enzyme lactase, which counteracts lactose, which is left after Past? People that are lactose intolerant find they can drink raw milk fine. Past. kills ALL bacteria, bad AND good. Only thing left is lactose (sugar). You are drinking dead bacteria, and sugar.
Cow can tolerate a number of bacteria that make us very sick, so a very healthy, grass-fed cow can give you a disease that will put you in the hospital with hemolytic urinary syndrome. On the other hand, you can buy pure cultures of bacteria like Lactobacillus and mix them into whatever your favorite food is, and avoid the risk of uncontrolled bacterial pathogens.
You can also add lactase to milk if that's your fancy.
I have no illusions of changing your mind. This seems to border on religion for some adherents. What I would like you to do is to challenge your sources. Are they reliable? Do they come from scientific sources? Can you identify those sources?
Try emailing a professor of dairy science on the topic, or visiting a university dairy, or look up the CDC, USDA, FFA, whatever, and see if their info jives with the Internet sites you frequent. Why or why not?
I have to actually pause this video at about the 6 minute mark to say you lost all credibility and are a complete fucking tool. You basically say "you are a dirty, uneducated spic if you drink raw milk. Or a hipster." I hate hipsters just as much as the next guy, but to put off a product because you think the only reason people drink it is to be 'cool,' I start to question if you work for the FDA or something. Totally uneducated. Take a BIO class. Past. milk kills essential enzymes. /Benefit.
@whickmant LOL what about the part where he says that uneducated Hispanic males are more likely to drink raw milk. So fucking what!!! Obesity has increased 10 fold in the past 25 years, so what does education have to do with good health! I have no doubt that this guy works for the FDA!
Pasteurization destroys anywhere from 10 to 50 percent of the vitamin C content in milk. You claim that raw milk has no measurable health benefits. Please explain this C0nc0rdance.
Milk is not a significant source of Vitamin C. At most, the content is 6 mg per 100 mL of fluid milk. The US RDA for Vitamin C is 90 mg, but daily doses for most people are in the 50-200 mg range. You'd need to drink about a liter of milk to meet those needs.
Also, you should check out 07:44 of the video. Burton 1988 did the nutritional profile of raw vs. pasteurized, and it was included here.
@C0nc0rdance I see your data on Ascorbic Acid at 7:44. From your chart, raw milk appears to be around 25% higher in vitamin C. According to a paper by Alfred Hess, pasteurization destroys at least 50% of the vitamin C content, this content being dependent on the food or fodder of the animal. Furthermore, Hess states that "Pasteurized milk gradually induces infantile scurvy, unless antiscorbutic diet is given in addition," and that "This disorder quickly yielded to the substitution of raw milk."
The whole premise of this video collapses in the face of the facts.
1. Raw Milk consumption is legal in Europe and consumed widely. There has been no mass outbreak of milk related illness.
2. Europe has as much access to research as the US and has come to a different conclusion about the safety of raw milk. The absence of illness see point [1] provides justification for this viewpoint.
The fact is free of the big dairy interests in the US, raw milk flourishes
The European Center for Disease Prevention and Control would beg to differ:
In their joint statement of 11 June 2011, they address the epidemic of listeria and E coli outbreaks from a variety of unpasteurized sources. Their advice is to avoid known risk factors like unpasteurized milk and juices.
There were 200 made sick by an outbreak of raw milk cheese listeriosis in the Netherlands in 2006. Plenty of small outbreaks since then in Germany, France and Switzerland.
Cheese outbreaks are irrelevant. There is significant processing between the production of milk and the production of cheese. Simply not washing hands is enough, even if the milk has been pasteurised.
The outbreak statistics are only meaningful if they can be attributed to licensed producers. I would not drink raw milk from an unlicensed producer any more than I would eat a sandwich from a man with dirty hands.
Cheese outbreaks are irrelevant. There is significant processing between the production of milk and the production of cheese. Simply not washing hands is enough, even if the milk has been pasteurised.
The outbreak statistics are only meaningful if they can be attributed to licensed producers. I would not drink raw milk from an unlicensed producer any more than I would eat a sandwich from a man with dirty hands.
The Mongols created the largest empire in history on a diet that consisted to a large extent of raw milk and raw milk products. It was a great advantage to them that they could obtain this food quickly (mares milk from the horses they were riding). As you can imagine, they would have to be pretty strong and healthy to achieve what they did.
propaganda! It is preposterous to claim that a industrial process designed to mask irresponsible dairy producers during the industrial revolution (the dawn of "agribusiness" as we know it) should somehow be considered "safer" than a natural product that sustained humanity for millennia.
My Dad works for a State Department of Agriculture and gets info about alot of this stuff, even though his main job is in seed fertilizer and meats. Honestly why do people believe what the doctors say and forget about what the scientists who study this stuff for a living say? It's risky. Personally my teeth are healthy, I've never had raw milk and I've never broken a bone. I also rarely get sick. I don't need to drink raw milk to stay healthy. Good video
@cheatdogg62 Actually acidity, salinity and dryness have absolutely nothing to do with the bacteria killing process that aging a cheese is associated with. It actually has everything to do with the culture used spreading throughout the cheese and killing the bacteria. For instance blue cheese uses Penicillium roqueforti the same strain used to create penicillin, one of the most powerful antibiotics used today. C0nc0rdance is really showing how little he knows and how much he is making up.
@C0nc0rdance Look I live in California and I've been drinking the stuff for years now and I have never gotten sick from it. I can't say the same thing about in n out burger. Consequentially the burger industry here has had a much worse history of e coli outbreaks. In fact from ONE outbreak at jack in the box 692 developed bloody diarrhea, 171 were hospitalized, and four incurred DEATH. Not to mention this was only 1 outbreak of many that have occurred at jack in the box, in n out and others.
Sorry pal I live in California where you can buy raw milk n the supermarket. I've been drinking it for two years. I've never gotten sick from it. I can't say the same thing about in n out burger. Sorry pal get pratical and avoid your superstitious attitudes. We've been doing it for 10 years I can roll down the hill and go to the closest supermarket and pick it up. Millions are sold a year without a single incident for ten years. It tastes like gold. You'd cream your pants if you tried it.
Sep 2006 "Organic Pastures" E coli outbreak hospitalizes two children, sickens a remaining 6.
Oct 2008 "Alexandre Eco Farms Dairy" Camplyobacter outbreak hospitalizes three, sickens 16, and one person develops GBS, paralyzing her ability to breathe. She was on forced respiration (breathing machine) for months.
Oct 1985 San Joaquin County dairy
Of 50 field trip students, 23 became ill (Campylobacter) following raw milk consumption. 22% had bloody diarrhea.
I'm glad you've never gotten sick. You probably never will. This is one of those rare events that strikes at random. However, just like we require motorcyclists to wear helmets, children to sit in booster seats in cars, we require that people not take stupid risks with the life of their family or selves. The majority of raw milk-borne outbreaks have been in California and Oregon, where it is legal for local sale. That's not a coincidence.
pasteurization is not there to protect the public. pasteurization is done b/c the milk, when combined with preservatives, can sit on the shelf for much longer periods of time than unpasteurized milk. it's just much more convenient for milk producers, who could only force this idiocy onto the market through the mechanism of the State.
are you implying that political organizations like the FDA have any vested interest whatsoever in protecting the public? govt organizations like the FDA just make bribery easier for politically connected corporations. of course we should be suspicious of all "scientific" studies, but we should be ESPECIALLY suspicious of govt ones, considering they have a vastly diminished liability and are funded through extortion.
I have a question for you C0nc0rdance, you say we should be skeptical (within reason) but what about us people who are too uneducated/stupid and/or too lazy to check sources, read scientific studies, or do anything else much to verify that the info we get is accurate. What should we do (short of not being lazy) to make sure we aren't being hoodwinked. I think it would be fair to say that many people, especially Americans are both however I doubt that's going to change, so what should we do?
Usually, you should look to see which way the majority of the experts are pointed. If you have a health question, Mayo Clinic or NIH or NCI. If you have a food question or nutrition, the USDA or American Society for Nutrition. Blogs/News stories are too poorly sourced. Go to the experts.
They may be wrong, but they'll be better informed than most. If an argument has failed to persuade the professional or governmental organizations, there is probably a reason.
Only a complete idiot or the person that posted this would ever believe raw grass fed milk is bad for you in any way. Just the same as drinking breast milk from your mother. As long as it's Grade A grass fed organic milk the only way to drink it is raw. Pasteurization was only because cows came down with TB in europe. At that time they didn't realize feed cows or any animal potato, grai
I found your video thought provoking. what does your research say about consuming semi-hard, aged cheeses like cheddar or Swiss that have been made with raw milk?
In the US, they can't be sold unless aged for at least 60 days. The aging process allows the acidic, salty and dry environment of cheese to kill the natural flora and prevent Listeria, E coli and Salmonella from being a health hazard. Soft unpasteurized cheeses are one of the leading causes of cheese related food-borne illness, especially in my region, Texas, where traditional Mexican cheeses (Quesa Fresca) made on small farms are very popular.
Paranoia is a great quality by the way...your obviously paranoid about other people getting sick from milk. Read all the comments and by far you are in the minority when it comes to the advocacy of drinking and having the choice to drink raw milk...humans flourish when they are free to make choices.
.you obviously prefer the nanny state...and the scientific dictatorship! Rule by experts?
Truth prevails...your silky smooth radio voice and professional presentation is no match for the truth! Your a paid shill. And no one is buying your deceptions. We see you! We are all awake!
Dude, I have 145 videos. One of them is about raw milk. As my low sound quality and flat powerpoint video format suggests, I'm just a guy with an interest in discussion. My area of interest is health and biology.
Don't invent conspiracies. It just makes you look paranoid.
Buddy, you need to get your facts strait and have some liable references. You are speaking out of your ass with no evidence but stories. Any scientific data other than Louis Pastures pasteurization process from the 18th century? Do you really think that FDA really gives a shit about whats healthy? FOOD and DRUG Administration! If I had a business where I can make money with food and drugs and someone was killing my drug business, then I would shut them down too. Your message was offensive.
Sources are cited within the video. The epidemiology data comes from MMWR archives at the US-CDC. The USDA, FDA, NIH, and most other federal agencies have statements on why they oppose raw milk consumption by humans. It's an unnecessarily risky behavior that could harm others through community acquired disease transmission.
Look up Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal Comic 2164 for an answer to your last statement. Something that offends you is not offensive to all.
@C0nc0rdance I understand that the MMWR, FDA, etc are all valuable company sources but you have to realize that alcohol, fast food, benadryl ( Diphenhydramine-used to make methamphetamine), and tobacco are all legal and they all have one problem in common-TAKING LIVES! There are thousands of food and drugs that can harm us and figuratively kill us, but why are the dangers only discussed with private companies rather than the real corporate threats?
@C0nc0rdance Do you work for the FDA? Did the government pay you to protest or assists in attacking farmers markets? Why are you going out of your way to try to influence the public to or foists fear with the work "RISK." Why do you use raw milk in comparison to the Fugu fish? We do not live in Japan and that was a horrible example especially from a race who invented "KAMIKAZE" missions. Our society takes value in finding new ways to help our new generation. What your doing is wrong.
@C0nc0rdance Your reading all of this? pasteurization? Pasteurization kills the milk! The milk has dead cells and turns into fat and sugar. Dead milk causes allergies and other illnesses. Get your facts straight.
Microbiology is a subject that I am fairly knowledgeable, so when I learned that there were individuals who ingested Raw Milk, I was confounded. As C0nc0rdance has illustrated in this video, unpasteurized milk substantially increases your susceptibility to contracting pathogenic microorganisms that cause Food-Borne Diseases.
First off, I have to laugh at the most ridiculous comparison of the Pufferfish vs Raw milk that just behooves me that's your argument for raw milk.
BTW, you also have to factor in the other 167 deaths, it would actually be 334 deaths (2 people die for every 167 deaths world wide= 334 dead, cause the chief kills himself, if he kills his customer by not preparing the fish correctly.
You should of did "Raw Milk VS SKY DIVING, less riskier then pufferfish more tragic if you don't pull the cord.
"So the evidence that a criminal conspiracy is underway is that scientific agencies oppose your personal views? Convenient."
Your words not mine.
The fact is a whole generation of smokers perished believing smoking was healthy.
As for.
J Hyg (Lond). 1932 Apr;32(2):293-300.
What is your point, that this paper was undisputed? If so the US govt. allowed a corporation to deliberately mislead millions believing smoking was safe.
That is a pretty serious claim, and you back it up?
Store milk makes me lethargic, my nose runs. Raw milk is energy in my veins, I feel great. Its called self-experimentation, its no "placebo." Try it yourself. Pasteurization makes sense where production standards are low. 19th century producers fed cows whiskey swill. Understand? Today we have wonderful farm fresh milk, the same stuff our ancestors evolved on for '000's of years, even better. Sometimes elderly and children die, no reason to punish everyone else. Only 2 dead? Really?
Guess you'll have to make a video about the horrors and risks of eating Cantaloupe now. 16 Dead. How many more have to die before you speak out against the dangers of Cantaloupe...?
NO ONE CAN MAKE FOOD SAFE. FACTORY FARMING IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH OUR FOOD SUPPLY. AND YOU... ARE WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE INTERNET. DISINFORMATION AND AGENDA-PANDERING. SHAME ON YOU!
@birdmanmn Unfortunately, given the already over-stretched food supply on the global level, and considering the fact that the human population is just going to keep growing and making the problem even more significant, large-scale, industrialized food production is probably necessary. I know there are people who will argue that the factory farms are not more productive than small ones in terms of relative numbers, but the fact is that the small farms cannot produce as much in actual numbers.
@birdmanmn ! YES! You have a free thinking mind and are a enlightened! The World needs more to wake up to your understanding! It's sad to see 898 likes and 64 dislikes for this video. If only the sheeple took the time to do some proper research... Fools lol
A final general point. Finding good food involves trial and error. I tried raw milk, and it worked well for me. Just like early men tried all kinds of fruits, fish and berries. Some were good, others not so good. There is no reward without risk.
If even 10% of people get real health benefits from raw milk, big drugs companies would lose a lot of money, big dairies too.
Commercial necessity dictates they oppose it, no matter what the truth is, so how much can you rely on what they say?
Poor guy. He is just ignorant about raw milk. Probably not stupid. Ignorant is just uneducated. Raw milk is superior when cows are grass fed. He bought into the lie. The largest outbreak of salminella was from PASTURIZED milk, infecting over 200,000 people! Raw milk has a natural antibiotic, when grass fed, that resists ecoli even! The FDA even patented this to prevent ecoli in meat plants! He needs to get educated outside of the governments grasp. So sad he made such a long video to spread lies
I am sorry some of the views expressed have been abusive.
Your analogy is faulty. The fish is intrinsically poisonous.
Raw milk is a problem when the cattle are kept is unhealthy conditions. When they are fed unnatural fodder. When they are given growth hormone and antibiotics. In short sick cows make sick milk.
Grass fed, free range cows, with space and air are not sick. Their dung does not contain pathogens.
Clean raw milk is safer than pasteurised homogenised milk.
I'm afraid that's not based on an examination of the facts. Take, for example, the raw milk outbreak in Pennsylvania in Feb 2008. 7 people reported illness, including one case of paralysis from Guillan Barre. The patients all tested PFGE identical for the strain of pathogenic Campylobacter found in the feces of the herd at Hendrick's Farm and Dairy, an organic, grass-fed, "mule-powered" family farm.
I don't think it's a safe assumption that bacteria are only found in sick animals.
Another one I just spotted is Pride and Joy Creamery, which uses only organic grass fed free-range cows this week issued a recall due to possible E Coli O157 contaminated products.
I will concede that the risk is relatively low, as with fugu, but it is still a risk. The fact that cows are grass fed or free range doesn't eliminate the risk of pathogenic bacteria, and the fact that this product is often fed to children or the elderly can result in unnecessary risk of life and health.
I am sure if you look hard enough you can find a few people that got sick from drinking raw milk. Maybe the farm broke the very strict rules for care and feeding of the herd.
The fact is homogenised milk has been linked to coronary heart disease. There are a lot more cases of that.
The difference is small dairies that sell raw milk own up to problems and they get fixed.
Big dairy uses lawyers and countless people get sick, remember tobacco?
What is your purpose in making this video. If it is to point out the risks, most raw milk drinkers know them better than you do? I have a relationship with the farm that supplies my milk. How many pasteurised milk drinkers know where their milk comes from?
That milk can contain bacteria, puss, bovine growth hormone, and oestrogen. Pasteurisation does not clean all that out, it just kills the pathogens. All the debris and chemicals are left in there.
What chemicals are present? How do they harm people? No specifics?
The CDC reports that raw milk drinkers are 22 times as likely to involved in a milk-born disease outbreak than non-raw milk drinkers. I think that says rather a lot, don't you?
Your original assertion was that grass-fed organic farms never had pathogens. I've shown you that this is not the case, including an outbreak THIS WEEK. It's hard to admit to a mistake, but it's good for the soul. Can you admit it?
Just on a side note, I'd say that you aren't that well educated on the risks of raw milk if you believe that a healthy cow can't possess human pathogens. Campylobacter spp. and E coli can be part of a healthy "grass-fed" cow's gut flora. It doesn't have to make the cow sick to make US sick.
Perhaps I've done a little educating on risks after all?
Raw milk is better than pasteurised. More vitamins, good bacteria, good cholesterol, digestive enzymes.
It needs to be clean, but that is not a function of the milk, but the dairy.
If I found a dead rat in a bottle of mineral water, I would not give up water, just demand clean water.
Hundreds drink raw milk with no ill-effects. As for your CDC figure. 22 times what? If the chance is 1 in 10,000,000 to start with, (for example) 22 times more is not much of a risk.
@C0nc0rdance Even though most strains of E. Coli are harmless, in certain environmental conditions, they can evolve into more virulent strains such as the serotype E. Coli O104:H4. Which is responsible for the 2011 outbreak of Food-Borne Illness in Europe.
Also- I have to wonder- are you against the use of cow manure as a fertilizer?
angelcarnivore 6 hours ago
False equivalency. Must be trolling.
angelcarnivore 6 hours ago
Concordance advocates violence against those who sell raw milk. What a violent person.
cincinatus90 8 hours ago
If you don't want to drink it, that's fine. But don't hide behind a mask of goodwill while pushing your own opinions off onto others. That makes you no different than people who protest funerals. Different agenda, same ultra-controlling mindset. Confine your control issues to yourself.
andinogrlrtm04 6 days ago
I don't drink milk often, and when I do it's raw. The FDA is full of it. I deal with them and they're almost as idiotic as TSA.
myfandango 1 week ago
Comment removed
freethefarmer 1 month ago
Comment removed
freethefarmer 1 month ago
Comment removed
freethefarmer 1 month ago
Comment removed
freethefarmer 1 month ago
and if u think the food on our shelves are safe, think again...... for example, some continental meals, stocks, etc have a chemical in it called "635" which is banned in Australia... why is it still on our shelves? isnt that enough evidence that the food safety people arent doing their job????
Heidipie1234 1 month ago
@Heidipie1234
Its worse than that. Many food additives are drugs defined as foods. MSG, Aspartame, Saccharin, the list goes on. As they are classified as foods the rules for approval are less strict. Many have not been in wide use for more than a generation and they are rarely if ever tested in combination.
In short we are in the middle of a massive clinical trial where it is almost impossible to tie down cause and effect. It is made worse by the lax labelling rules.
wjestick 1 month ago
@Heidipie1234 The FDA allowed the biotech industry to genetically engineer a tomato with a fish and release it into the population with no testing even required. Does any one else think that this is absolutely insane? What happened to the precautionary principle? Well I don't need an FDA approval for raw milk because people througout Europe, Africa and Asia have been drinking it (and thriving on it) for over 10,000 years! It has stood the test of time!
TheRtlillico 3 weeks ago
raw milk is far safer than pasterised milk... because raw milk has the good digestion bacteria and the enzimes it protects u from viruses and deseases... whether as the pasterised milk, the bacteria and the enzimes are destroyed which means the milk has more of a chance of being contaminated with dangerous bacteria......
Heidipie1234 1 month ago
your critique of raw milk could easily be applied to the produce industry. Numerous outbreaks of e-coli and other infectious diseases have been reported over the years in the raw vegetables (the most recent being the cantaloupe melon). Does that mean we should stop eating raw fruits and vegetables? No more salads?
blkscreen15 1 month ago
If raw milk is soooo dangerous, then why are there hundreds of raw milk vending machines in Italy? Here's a statistic that really jumps out at me ConC0rdance; in the past 11 years no person has died from raw milk. This year alone 76 people died from eating cantaloupe. The FDA is corrupt, incompetent and incapable of protecting you. Don't be brainwashed by them.
TheRtlillico 2 months ago 7
@TheRtlillico I think WebMD is a better source.
PoliticalWeekly 2 months ago
@PoliticalWeekly The Western Price Foundation is also a good source.
TheRtlillico 2 months ago
Can you provide raw data for these raw milk related outbreaks? When the headline information is carefully examined, cases have been found where the reasoning used to assign blame to raw milk has been far from rigorous.
Nothing the CDC publishes is peer reviewed. Evidence of filtering during the investigation of outbreaks has also been seen "E.g. sick people asked if they drank raw milk" if yes, they are included in the data, if not they are sent home.
wjestick 2 months ago
@DarklingX
Life expectancy of 30-40yrs includes high infant mortality.
wjestick 2 months ago
What about the quantity of milk the people actually drink? You seem to assume that everybody are equal regarding the risk of the milk and that everyone drink the same quantity of milk. If somebody actually choses to drink raw milk, couldn't you suppose that he would be a more regular drinker than many other people? What about how sensible people are to milk? We know that many people are more sensible to milk (gastric problems and stuff) than other, wouldn't that matter in your figures?
psychoh13 2 months ago
This year 76 people died from eating cantaloupe. FDA approved drug Vioxx killed an estimated 55,000 people before it was recalled in 2004. Can you imagine their weeping families C0nc0rdance? How many people have died from drinking raw milk in the past 11 years? None, the two deaths cited by this video are from raw cheese not raw milk. How's that for putting things in perspective C0nc0rdance?
TheRtlillico 2 months ago
Only One Problem
Humans have been and still are drinking raw milk, it will not get you sick, dont worry about those who say raw milk is bad, its completely normal.
itsadeadmansparty 2 months ago
question, when these producers of raw milk have a contaminated product, what bacteria tend to be the culprits most of the time? More specifically are there any group E escherichia-coli found? from what i understand 0157:H7 tends to be responsible for many cases of HUS.
803brando 2 months ago
It's a shame what happened to the CDC - it was America's last hope...
Rarae192 2 months ago
concordance i think you should have mentioned one of the serious complications from listeria monocytogenes, listeric meningitis. these science-denier-alt-med-hipsters think of stomach pains and missing a day of work when thinking of 'food born illness'.
803brando 2 months ago
@803brando
Good point... I was thinking only of hemolytic urinary syndrome, but Listeric meningitis can be transmitted by food or water. I'm not sure if there are any cases in the literature.
People forget how often kids, the elderly or pregnant moms are the ones being harmed by dangerous practices like this.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance my comment may have seemed artless, I blame it on my ignorance. I should have posted that in the form of a question.
803brando 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
You seem to have lost all the good research you did. I would love to read the papers you found that showed that there are no nutritional benefits to raw milk. I feel I must point out that the test for successful pasteurisation is the destruction of the enzyme phosphatase, which is needed to absorb calcium from milk. I would say that alone is a huge nutritional difference. So how about some citations?
wjestick 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance so how come calfs are fine with it? difference in IS affinity?
RoScFan 1 month ago
@RoScFan
That's a sharp question. Cows are ruminants, which means they have a very different set of microbiota in their gut. Antibodies are species specific, what constitutes passive immunization for a calf would represent a foreign protein antigen to you.
C0nc0rdance 1 month ago
Comment removed
TheRtlillico 4 weeks ago
@TheRtlillico Oh my god, there is a 1 in 150,000 chance that the raw milk Queen Elizabeth gave to Prince Harry and Price William will make them sick!!! SOMEBODY PUT THIS WOMAN IN JAIL!!!!!!!!
TheRtlillico 3 weeks ago
This is such bullshit! The microorganisms in "raw milk" are great for your body. Nasty mega produced store bought milk is terrible for you - your body can't digest it. I'll take my chances with healthy grass fed cows. Thanks for the propaganda, but it doesn't work on me.
saraanneburrows 2 months ago
Comment removed
803brando 2 months ago
@saraanneburrows non raw milk from stores can come from healthy grass fed cows too. Just look for 'biological products' or 'free range' or something. Raw or not says nothing about how the cows were reared. It's only about the treatment of the milk after milking. Have you even watched the entire video, because all this was mentioned. It was even said in the video that milk from free range cows is less risky than mass produced milk from megafarms. Have you been paying attention? Guess not.
weelittledragon 2 months ago
when i'll have time (after my exam in two weeks) I'll check myself the stats because the way you presented this makes me suspect you allready had made your opinion first and then set out to find numbers to support it. don't take it personnaly, if you are unbiased i shall reach the same conclusion.
coucoulardtich 2 months ago
Well in france where i live, a lot of our cheese are raw milk (and i personnaly think the taste variety is worth the risk), but i've never heard anyone mentionned us having more or less dairy related accident than in the us where raw milk is less common.
coucoulardtich 2 months ago
C0nc0rdance, at 9:52, you give figures on the number of raw and pasteurized milk outbreaks. I am interested to know where you got this data from? I would also like to know how many people got sick from pasteurized milk, not just the number of outbreaks.
TheRtlillico 2 months ago
@TheRtlillico
I'm sorry to say that the source material for this video was wiped out with my computer crash. I think it was a 2005 MMWR article, but I don't have the full citation for you, sorry. You can go to the CDC Raw Milk Q&A page, and it has summaries of research work on the topic. I'll quote a short section for you here:
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
"Among dairy product-associated outbreaks reported to CDC between 1973 and 2009 in which the investigators reported whether the product was pasteurized or raw, 82% were due to raw milk or cheese. From 1998 through 2009, 93 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,837 illnesses, 195 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths."
"among the 93 raw dairy product outbreaks from 1998 to 2009, 79% involved at least one person less than 20 years old."
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
ibid. "Although precise data are not available, it is thought that less than 1% of milk sold to consumers in the United States has not been pasteurized."
I will concede that the FoodSafetyNet article you cited suggests a slightly higher figure... somewhere between 2.1 and 3.3%, although I suspect that I'm not comparing properly... 1% sold, but 3% consumed might suggest that there are homes where milk is not consumed at all?
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance, 1% sold and 3% consumed may be explained by raw milk propagation by means other than sale, i.e. gifts, sharing, or even the dairy farmer's themselves. If I produced a food product myself, you probably wouldn't find me shopping for it somewhere else.
attheveryend 2 months ago
I grew up on a diary farm. I've had my share of raw milk. It is indeed quite good, but not something you just want to gorge yourself on...
Like c0nc0rdance said. Cows are not clean, and most farms don't clean the milk-extraction nozzel thingies from cow to cow. Unless they drop it in shit. Usually a farm only has about twenty or so of these nozzels per 100 animals, and they just go down the line with them.
attheveryend 3 months ago
get raw milk .. boil it for 10 mins or so and there you go ... no more microbes and great taste ... don't buy milk from corporations its shit
Akirilus 3 months ago
O.K. The population of America is 607 million and the % of people that drink raw milk is around 3.04. Therefore the number of people that drink raw milk is 0.0304*607e6=9.66 million. According to the CDC, an average of 61 people get sick from raw milk per year (personally I believe this is less). Therefore the percentage of those RM drinkers that get sick is (61/9.66e6)*100=0.00065%. That's a risk I'm willing to take, especially since no one has died in the past 11 years from drinking raw milk.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
can you explain why my grandmothers lived to 98, 99, 89, and 107 and drank raw milk every one of my grandmothers.
yourroaddog 3 months ago
@yourroaddog also i should add that now my parents who drink other milk are very sick and dead
yourroaddog 3 months ago
@yourroaddog
You can't be sick AND dead... and you can't have four grandmothers. Joking?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
? question about nutrition? Would you be interested in a couple of articles about raw milk and pasteurized milk fed to calves?
yogaduder 3 months ago
3:36 - Many of these cases were a result of cows living in confined conditions and being fed swill from nearby liquor distillies. This was found in many large cities such as NY, Philly, and Boston. If you feed an animal poor food, it's going to yield a poor product. Maybe even a lethal product. Although your fish friend is a special case, hehe. One could experiment in a garden. Have a section of poor soil quality and a section of rich, nutrient dense soil. Which lettuce will taste better?
yogaduder 3 months ago
And grow better and provide a more nutrient dense food?
yogaduder 3 months ago
Here's another one for you Mr FDA man. CDC has admitted that raw milk has not killed a single person in 11 years. Do you have any comments on this?
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
"From 1998 through 2008, 86 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,676 illnesses, 191 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. Because not all cases of foodborne illness are recognized and reported, the actual number of illnesses associated with raw milk likely is greater. "
CDC website "Raw milk" FAQ
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance After being threatened with a FOIA by Mark McAfee, (owner of Organic Pastures Dairy) the CDC admitted that one of the "raw milk" deaths was actually linked to illegal raw queso fresco cheese. The agency has not yet provided details about the other death, but it is likely that it, too, was linked to some adulterated raw milk product rather than to raw milk itself. In 2006 alone, there were at least 1,300 people who got sick from pasteurized milk just in California (NaturalNewsdotcom)
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
Yes, and in 2006, in California alone, (from a single outbreak) there were 47 cases of illness from raw milk. There are 100 pasteurized milk drinkers for every raw milk drinker... so the proper comparison would be 13 cases of pasteurized milk illnesses vs. 47 raw milk illnesses. Almost 4 fold higher rate of disease.
If you expand it to the whole country, over the last decade, raw milk is responsible for 25% of disease, but only 1% of consumption. It is a much higher risk.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Actually, according to a very large telephone survey by FoodNet carried out in 2007, 3.04% of the population drinks raw milk. You can't base the safety of raw milk for the whole country on two Californian outbreaks. Lets put this in perspective; According to the CDC in the past 13 years an average of 61 people per year have become sick from raw milk. Conversely, all other foods account for over 100,000 people being hospitalized per year and 3,000 dying (Mercola dot com).
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
Interesting about the FoodNet survey.
Base jumping killed 13 people in 2006.
Airplane crashes killed 1,292 people in 2006.
Are you 100 times better off jumping out of an airplane than not? Or is the rate of exposure important when comparing the number of times and the number of people exposed? Do more people eat spinach or raw milk? Hamburgers or raw milk?
Try to be a little less biased.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance BTW, since you're so fond of your base jumping analogies; if I have the right to risk my life base jumping, then why shouldn't I have the right to take the miniscule risk of drinking raw milk? I think you know the answer and it has nothing to do with food safety.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
Actually, BASE jumping is illegal in most places, mostly for insurance reasons. You can't jump in any federal park land, and you must get permission from the owner of the building or you're trespassing, and subject to arrest. No business owner is likely to grant you permission given the liability they would assume.
Key differences:
Children are exposed to raw milk
Milkborne diseases can be transmitted to others
Raw milk is a more prevalent issue
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance the joy of the newest youtube personal homepages: random comments from your subs' 'ancient' videos appear in your news feed.
Why this is an advantage: more views for the videos in question and a chance for subs to see vids made before they subbed.
Why this is a disadvantage: I don't like change.
gleehmee 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico Drinking base jumpers is almost always personal choise, exposing a child to raw milk is not their personal choise and not a risk people should be taking 'for' them.
gleehmee 3 months ago
I have 3 arguments why parents should have the right to feed their kids raw milk: 1. It has been shown that when babies are fed a diet that consists solely of pasteurized milk they develop infantile scurvy. 2. With 0.00065% of raw milk drinkers getting sick from raw milk per year, it's not exactly playing Russian Roulette with your children's health. 3. It's traditional; I grew up on raw milk, so did my parents, so did their parents and so did every single generation in my family.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
1. you shouldn't be feeding babies cows milk to begin with, breast milk or specifically synthesised milks only until they pass a certain age.
2. slanted statistic based on a limited test group
3. irrelevant. who cares if it's traditional? if it's dangerous, why continue?
gleehmee 3 months ago
@gleehmee Lets talk about the accuracy of my "slanted statistic". The number of people who drink raw milk has been determined from an extensive FoodNet service, C0nCordance will tell you it is valid. The number of people who have become sick from the years 2000 to 2008 has been given as 27 cases per year according to a peer reviewed paper by P. Oliver. The data C0nCordance has used is actually for raw milk and cheese made from raw milk and this is a milk debate only, so his data doesn't count.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico so on the one hand you use C0nc0rdance as an authority for one side and then identify him as not an authority on the other hand? Consistency please.
The statistic, as with any statistic, is limited to the area and size of the test group and came from, it indicates something, it does not state it as a general rule.
As the other 2 points did not stand, the middle point is unsupported further limiting how informative the post really is.
gleehmee 3 months ago
@gleehmee If you are going to accept C0nc0rdances data then, (in the case of the population that drinks raw milk) you also have to accept mine, because they come from the same place, the CDC. The point that I made in my last post is valid, this is a raw milk debate and C0nc0rdance has used data for both raw milk and cheese made from raw milk and so it cannot be used. The data I have used for the number of sicknesses is peer reviewed, so if that isn't good enough for you then what is?
TheRtlillico 2 months ago
@TheRtlillico the actual citation perhaps?
You're also assuming I'm accepting C0ncordance's data, and upon that, that I'm accepting it for no good reason. As to my previous comment on the reliability of statistics, any statatistics taken from this direction, on their own they mean only what they say about the group they themselves were taken from, the general point I took from the video is the important part, to which the specific statistic supports but is not the heart of the matter.
gleehmee 2 months ago
@gleehmee Point taken, there are many studies that contradict one another and statistics can vary considerably. So what specific part of the video lead you to conclude that raw milk is so dangerous? Was it the part about the Mexicans?
TheRtlillico 2 months ago
Comment removed
gleehmee 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRtlillico Not 'dangerous. just 'more dangerous'.
It wasn't the video that convinced me, it's just somehting I've learned over time.
However, it is not something I would give to children, when there is an alternative that is shown to be safer, if you are going with statistics. That 1%vs99%:56%vs44% statistic explains the reason for my position on this matter quiet well, if we're going with statistics.
gleehmee 2 months ago
The fact that this video overlooks is that raw milk drinkers are informed consumers. They probably know more about raw milk than most pasteurised milk drinkers know about what they drink. I know who produces my milk, does he?
If raw milk was so bad, we, the raw milk drinkers would shut down the dairies ourselves by not buying it. The fact that despite a multi-million dollar propaganda and lobbying campaign, that has not happened, should tell the the outsider to investigate why.
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
Argumentum ad populum:
"Raw milk must be safe, people are still drinking it"
"Blood letting must be effective at treating bad humors... why else would so many people do it for so many centuries?"
"Base jumping can't be dangerous, or people would stop doing it"
People are very good at self-deception.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
People always resort to Latin when they run out of ideas.
1. Base jumping is dangerous, people understand and do it anyway.
2. Blood letting is like chemotherapy, sometimes it worked, often it did not, plenty of science behind chemo.
The simple fact is you say raw milk is risky, and yet people who take that risk don't stop. Either they are getting sick all the time and persisting, or they don't and you are wrong.
Thousands of years of raw milk consumption suggest you are wrong
wjestick 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
Just a little anecdote since you brought up blood letting. Leeches were a popular therapy in antiquity. Then Western science gave it the thumbs down as barbaric. Then research revealed it was a sound medical technique and now you can get leeched by your very own board certified doctor.
What next, maggots is wounds ?? Antibacterial fungus treatments?? They all started way before science came along, sometimes observation and honesty is enough.
wjestick 3 months ago
The best advice is to realise that there are two kinds of raw milk.
1. Raw milk intended for pasteurisation (99% of milk produced)
2.Raw milk intended for human consumption.
I advocate drinking type 2 only, from certified dairies. Uncertified raw milk is like eating road kill. If road kill makes you sick, you don't close down reputable butchers.
There is no substitute for first hand experience. Raw milk kills pathogens, and the scaremongering done here can safely be ignored after due diligence
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
If raw milk kills pathogens, why is it responsible for 20 times the number of cases of illness and hospitalization as pasteurized? Wouldn't it be responsible for zero illnesses?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
The fact you have admitted pasteurisation causes sickness answers your own question. Even heat damaging milk is not 100% efficient.
As for outbreak stats you keep quoting, close examination of specific cases reveals, bias, mis-reporting and some quite lazy evidence gathering. Further, the statistics don't separate certified and un-certified sources.
If I got a bad burger at a garden barbecue, it is not the same as getting it from Macdonald's, unless you ask the CDC.
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
This is the "conspiracy fallacy", and it's very popular here on YouTube. You've found a way to dismiss all evidence that doesn't line up with your preconceived notions, so you can never be wrong. We call this in science an "unfalsifiable hypothesis".
Some might say that disease outbreaks at certified raw milk dairies put the lie to your assertion: "Raw milk kills pathogens", but I know that's something you could never admit.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
Science is what happens in the physical world, we can all do it to some extent. The Literature is what is allowed to be recorded. It is only as good as the system of validation. When the people in that system are funded by interests who have a stake in what they say, the results must be viewed in that light.
Sorry, I think science is cool, but I am not blind to the role of politics and corruption as you seem to be.
wjestick 3 months ago
The Author of this video is on a mission to spread ignorance. He states he would not risk drinking raw milk. Great, so why try to lecture those of use who have forgotten more than he will ever know on the subject.
I have never eaten Oysters, don't know what they taste like or what they would do to me. I know if they go bad I could get sick.
But no matter how many peer reviewed papers I read, I will still be ignorant until I try eating some, and nothing will change that.
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
I have never injected heroin, either, but I feel pretty confident presenting reasons you might not want to do so.
Really, this is such a silly argument I can't bring myself to take it seriously. Have you ever dripped vinegar into your eyes? How do you know it isn't awesome until you try it?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
So how did you get started drinking water, eating food, using a computer, tying your shoes, having sex. I could go on but I hope you can figure out where this is going. It is called "Trial and error" outside the Ivory tower where you seem to want to imprison humanity, that is how people figure things out. Look it up!
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
Are you saying your method for determining if a water source is safe is to drink from it? Trial and error doesn't work so well when the consequences are hospitalization.
Have you tried putting vinegar in your eye yet? It's totally rad, all the cool kids are doing it.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
We are talking about certified organic raw milk. Labs do a great job checking it for pathogens. Millions of servings have been certified pathogen free in California that way. All the cool states are doing it.
wjestick 3 months ago
1. Humans live in symbiosis with the bacteria in our food. Bacteria help us to digest our food, protect ourselves from pathogens and manufacture vitamins.
2. The best source of of bacteria is from our environment, as this source is proven over many generations to work.
3. The comment about cow fecal bacteria showed your ignorance. The same bacteria live in other places, like cabbage, where they make sauerkraut. So we could call them cabbage bacteria.
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
Um... no to all of these.
1. We live in symbiosis with our natural flora, which does NOT come from contaminated food.
2. The environment contains pathogens and commensals. Randomly eating dirty things is not a safe way to introduce bacteria to your gut. Don't lick cows, please.
3. Fecal coliforms, when present in fermented products, result in spoilage. That's why cleaning the jars and sterilizing them (similar to pasteurizing) is so important. Otherwise you get sick.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
1. Sorry to disappoint you, but the pro-biotics that you probably quaff down because they are safe, are found naturally in food. You can pickle cabbage without adding any starter culture because it is present in the cabbage.
2. Sauerkraut, Youhurt, raw milk and other fermented foods are natural probiotics. So no need to lick any animal, just turn off the heater.
3. Some animals like elephants get essential flora from fecal material.
I drink raw milk, what is your Agenda?
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
When you make preserves or pickles or yogurt, is it important to boil the jars, the lids, the containers and the utensils? Why is that, do you think?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance - You might boil jars if your pickling. I personally don't when I'm fermenting.
You should try some of the fermented dishes in Nourishing Traditions! Very tasty, benefits your poop, and helps digestion with cooked food! I'm a big fan of the beet kvass recipe! Plus I enjoy making kefir with goats milk.
It's especially delicious with:
3 raw eggs(from pastured chickens)
1/3 of raw cream to kefir(A sweet guernsey lady)
a little vanilla
a little cinnamon
and celtic sea salt
yogaduder 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance - If you are curious about fermentation at all, Sandor Ellix Katz is worth mentioning. I'm not sure what his education specs are, but I do know he's been fermenting for 17 years. He's got some youtube vid's too.
yogaduder 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance licking cows is bad? thanks for ruining my day!
jondavidgriffin 3 months ago
@jondavidgriffin
The cows might like it.... if you're into that sort of thing. : )
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
I had a long thoughtful response then it didnt post UGH! main points: Enzymes are needed for basic 'chemical reactions' in the body. Something most are missing out on and don't realize it. Did you know raw milk has an enzyme lactase, which counteracts lactose, which is left after Past? People that are lactose intolerant find they can drink raw milk fine. Past. kills ALL bacteria, bad AND good. Only thing left is lactose (sugar). You are drinking dead bacteria, and sugar.
whickmant 3 months ago
@whickmant
Cow enzymes are not absorbed by your body. If they were, they would cause an immune response since they are foreign antigens.
The first place milk goes is into your stomach, where acids and stomach enzymes break down all food proteins into basic monomers called amino acids.
Lactase breaks the sugar, lactose, into glucose and galactose, also both sugars.
Why do you want cow fecal bacteria in your gut? Why not just lick the cow?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
Cow can tolerate a number of bacteria that make us very sick, so a very healthy, grass-fed cow can give you a disease that will put you in the hospital with hemolytic urinary syndrome. On the other hand, you can buy pure cultures of bacteria like Lactobacillus and mix them into whatever your favorite food is, and avoid the risk of uncontrolled bacterial pathogens.
You can also add lactase to milk if that's your fancy.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
I have no illusions of changing your mind. This seems to border on religion for some adherents. What I would like you to do is to challenge your sources. Are they reliable? Do they come from scientific sources? Can you identify those sources?
Try emailing a professor of dairy science on the topic, or visiting a university dairy, or look up the CDC, USDA, FFA, whatever, and see if their info jives with the Internet sites you frequent. Why or why not?
Be equally skeptical!
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
I have to actually pause this video at about the 6 minute mark to say you lost all credibility and are a complete fucking tool. You basically say "you are a dirty, uneducated spic if you drink raw milk. Or a hipster." I hate hipsters just as much as the next guy, but to put off a product because you think the only reason people drink it is to be 'cool,' I start to question if you work for the FDA or something. Totally uneducated. Take a BIO class. Past. milk kills essential enzymes. /Benefit.
whickmant 3 months ago
@whickmant
What do the cow enzymes do for you? Are you absorbing them, or are they doing something to the milk?
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@whickmant LOL what about the part where he says that uneducated Hispanic males are more likely to drink raw milk. So fucking what!!! Obesity has increased 10 fold in the past 25 years, so what does education have to do with good health! I have no doubt that this guy works for the FDA!
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
Pasteurization destroys anywhere from 10 to 50 percent of the vitamin C content in milk. You claim that raw milk has no measurable health benefits. Please explain this C0nc0rdance.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
@TheRtlillico
Milk is not a significant source of Vitamin C. At most, the content is 6 mg per 100 mL of fluid milk. The US RDA for Vitamin C is 90 mg, but daily doses for most people are in the 50-200 mg range. You'd need to drink about a liter of milk to meet those needs.
Also, you should check out 07:44 of the video. Burton 1988 did the nutritional profile of raw vs. pasteurized, and it was included here.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance I see your data on Ascorbic Acid at 7:44. From your chart, raw milk appears to be around 25% higher in vitamin C. According to a paper by Alfred Hess, pasteurization destroys at least 50% of the vitamin C content, this content being dependent on the food or fodder of the animal. Furthermore, Hess states that "Pasteurized milk gradually induces infantile scurvy, unless antiscorbutic diet is given in addition," and that "This disorder quickly yielded to the substitution of raw milk."
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
The whole premise of this video collapses in the face of the facts.
1. Raw Milk consumption is legal in Europe and consumed widely. There has been no mass outbreak of milk related illness.
2. Europe has as much access to research as the US and has come to a different conclusion about the safety of raw milk. The absence of illness see point [1] provides justification for this viewpoint.
The fact is free of the big dairy interests in the US, raw milk flourishes
wjestick 3 months ago
@wjestick
The European Center for Disease Prevention and Control would beg to differ:
In their joint statement of 11 June 2011, they address the epidemic of listeria and E coli outbreaks from a variety of unpasteurized sources. Their advice is to avoid known risk factors like unpasteurized milk and juices.
There were 200 made sick by an outbreak of raw milk cheese listeriosis in the Netherlands in 2006. Plenty of small outbreaks since then in Germany, France and Switzerland.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
Cheese outbreaks are irrelevant. There is significant processing between the production of milk and the production of cheese. Simply not washing hands is enough, even if the milk has been pasteurised.
The outbreak statistics are only meaningful if they can be attributed to licensed producers. I would not drink raw milk from an unlicensed producer any more than I would eat a sandwich from a man with dirty hands.
wjestick 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
Cheese outbreaks are irrelevant. There is significant processing between the production of milk and the production of cheese. Simply not washing hands is enough, even if the milk has been pasteurised.
The outbreak statistics are only meaningful if they can be attributed to licensed producers. I would not drink raw milk from an unlicensed producer any more than I would eat a sandwich from a man with dirty hands.
wjestick 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Mongols created the largest empire in history on a diet that consisted to a large extent of raw milk and raw milk products. It was a great advantage to them that they could obtain this food quickly (mares milk from the horses they were riding). As you can imagine, they would have to be pretty strong and healthy to achieve what they did.
TheRtlillico 3 months ago
propaganda! It is preposterous to claim that a industrial process designed to mask irresponsible dairy producers during the industrial revolution (the dawn of "agribusiness" as we know it) should somehow be considered "safer" than a natural product that sustained humanity for millennia.
kenzadelphia 3 months ago
My Dad works for a State Department of Agriculture and gets info about alot of this stuff, even though his main job is in seed fertilizer and meats. Honestly why do people believe what the doctors say and forget about what the scientists who study this stuff for a living say? It's risky. Personally my teeth are healthy, I've never had raw milk and I've never broken a bone. I also rarely get sick. I don't need to drink raw milk to stay healthy. Good video
Cahleeb 3 months ago
@cheatdogg62 Actually acidity, salinity and dryness have absolutely nothing to do with the bacteria killing process that aging a cheese is associated with. It actually has everything to do with the culture used spreading throughout the cheese and killing the bacteria. For instance blue cheese uses Penicillium roqueforti the same strain used to create penicillin, one of the most powerful antibiotics used today. C0nc0rdance is really showing how little he knows and how much he is making up.
skullnkross 3 months ago
@skullnkross
So the only thing keeping cheese from being over-run by bacteria is the presence of antibiotics secreted by unicellular fungi? No.
From "Food Microbiology" textbook:
"Factors that determine the rates of spoilage of cheeses are water activity, pH, salt
to moisture ratio, temperature, characteristics of the lactic starter culture, types
and viability of contaminating microorganisms, and characteristics and quantities
of residual enzymes."
Ledenbach and Marshall (2009)
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance That's for spoilage rates not sterilization.
skullnkross 3 months ago
Comment removed
skullnkross 3 months ago
Comment removed
skullnkross 3 months ago
Comment removed
skullnkross 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Look I live in California and I've been drinking the stuff for years now and I have never gotten sick from it. I can't say the same thing about in n out burger. Consequentially the burger industry here has had a much worse history of e coli outbreaks. In fact from ONE outbreak at jack in the box 692 developed bloody diarrhea, 171 were hospitalized, and four incurred DEATH. Not to mention this was only 1 outbreak of many that have occurred at jack in the box, in n out and others.
skullnkross 3 months ago
Comment removed
skullnkross 3 months ago
Sorry pal I live in California where you can buy raw milk n the supermarket. I've been drinking it for two years. I've never gotten sick from it. I can't say the same thing about in n out burger. Sorry pal get pratical and avoid your superstitious attitudes. We've been doing it for 10 years I can roll down the hill and go to the closest supermarket and pick it up. Millions are sold a year without a single incident for ten years. It tastes like gold. You'd cream your pants if you tried it.
skullnkross 3 months ago 2
@skullnkross
Sep 2006 "Organic Pastures" E coli outbreak hospitalizes two children, sickens a remaining 6.
Oct 2008 "Alexandre Eco Farms Dairy" Camplyobacter outbreak hospitalizes three, sickens 16, and one person develops GBS, paralyzing her ability to breathe. She was on forced respiration (breathing machine) for months.
Oct 1985 San Joaquin County dairy
Of 50 field trip students, 23 became ill (Campylobacter) following raw milk consumption. 22% had bloody diarrhea.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
I'm glad you've never gotten sick. You probably never will. This is one of those rare events that strikes at random. However, just like we require motorcyclists to wear helmets, children to sit in booster seats in cars, we require that people not take stupid risks with the life of their family or selves. The majority of raw milk-borne outbreaks have been in California and Oregon, where it is legal for local sale. That's not a coincidence.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
Comment removed
skullnkross 3 months ago
bs!
RedL3monade 3 months ago
pasteurization is not there to protect the public. pasteurization is done b/c the milk, when combined with preservatives, can sit on the shelf for much longer periods of time than unpasteurized milk. it's just much more convenient for milk producers, who could only force this idiocy onto the market through the mechanism of the State.
junior00bacon00chee 3 months ago 2
"to subvert this protection"
are you implying that political organizations like the FDA have any vested interest whatsoever in protecting the public? govt organizations like the FDA just make bribery easier for politically connected corporations. of course we should be suspicious of all "scientific" studies, but we should be ESPECIALLY suspicious of govt ones, considering they have a vastly diminished liability and are funded through extortion.
junior00bacon00chee 3 months ago
I have a question for you C0nc0rdance, you say we should be skeptical (within reason) but what about us people who are too uneducated/stupid and/or too lazy to check sources, read scientific studies, or do anything else much to verify that the info we get is accurate. What should we do (short of not being lazy) to make sure we aren't being hoodwinked. I think it would be fair to say that many people, especially Americans are both however I doubt that's going to change, so what should we do?
VetinariClone 3 months ago
@VetinariClone
Usually, you should look to see which way the majority of the experts are pointed. If you have a health question, Mayo Clinic or NIH or NCI. If you have a food question or nutrition, the USDA or American Society for Nutrition. Blogs/News stories are too poorly sourced. Go to the experts.
They may be wrong, but they'll be better informed than most. If an argument has failed to persuade the professional or governmental organizations, there is probably a reason.
C0nc0rdance 3 months ago
Comment removed
VetinariClone 3 months ago
Only a complete idiot or the person that posted this would ever believe raw grass fed milk is bad for you in any way. Just the same as drinking breast milk from your mother. As long as it's Grade A grass fed organic milk the only way to drink it is raw. Pasteurization was only because cows came down with TB in europe. At that time they didn't realize feed cows or any animal potato, grai
n or corn made them sick.
TIMHOFFER 4 months ago
I found your video thought provoking. what does your research say about consuming semi-hard, aged cheeses like cheddar or Swiss that have been made with raw milk?
cheatdogg62 4 months ago
@cheatdogg62
In the US, they can't be sold unless aged for at least 60 days. The aging process allows the acidic, salty and dry environment of cheese to kill the natural flora and prevent Listeria, E coli and Salmonella from being a health hazard. Soft unpasteurized cheeses are one of the leading causes of cheese related food-borne illness, especially in my region, Texas, where traditional Mexican cheeses (Quesa Fresca) made on small farms are very popular.
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
Paranoia is a great quality by the way...your obviously paranoid about other people getting sick from milk. Read all the comments and by far you are in the minority when it comes to the advocacy of drinking and having the choice to drink raw milk...humans flourish when they are free to make choices.
.you obviously prefer the nanny state...and the scientific dictatorship! Rule by experts?
MmIlahg 4 months ago
Truth prevails...your silky smooth radio voice and professional presentation is no match for the truth! Your a paid shill. And no one is buying your deceptions. We see you! We are all awake!
MmIlahg 4 months ago
@MmIlahg
Dude, I have 145 videos. One of them is about raw milk. As my low sound quality and flat powerpoint video format suggests, I'm just a guy with an interest in discussion. My area of interest is health and biology.
Don't invent conspiracies. It just makes you look paranoid.
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago 2
Buddy, you need to get your facts strait and have some liable references. You are speaking out of your ass with no evidence but stories. Any scientific data other than Louis Pastures pasteurization process from the 18th century? Do you really think that FDA really gives a shit about whats healthy? FOOD and DRUG Administration! If I had a business where I can make money with food and drugs and someone was killing my drug business, then I would shut them down too. Your message was offensive.
shredsification 4 months ago
@shredsification
Sources are cited within the video. The epidemiology data comes from MMWR archives at the US-CDC. The USDA, FDA, NIH, and most other federal agencies have statements on why they oppose raw milk consumption by humans. It's an unnecessarily risky behavior that could harm others through community acquired disease transmission.
Look up Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal Comic 2164 for an answer to your last statement. Something that offends you is not offensive to all.
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance I understand that the MMWR, FDA, etc are all valuable company sources but you have to realize that alcohol, fast food, benadryl ( Diphenhydramine-used to make methamphetamine), and tobacco are all legal and they all have one problem in common-TAKING LIVES! There are thousands of food and drugs that can harm us and figuratively kill us, but why are the dangers only discussed with private companies rather than the real corporate threats?
shredsification 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Do you work for the FDA? Did the government pay you to protest or assists in attacking farmers markets? Why are you going out of your way to try to influence the public to or foists fear with the work "RISK." Why do you use raw milk in comparison to the Fugu fish? We do not live in Japan and that was a horrible example especially from a race who invented "KAMIKAZE" missions. Our society takes value in finding new ways to help our new generation. What your doing is wrong.
shredsification 4 months ago
@shredsification You come off as a little, no, actually a lot, racist here.
VetinariClone 3 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Your reading all of this? pasteurization? Pasteurization kills the milk! The milk has dead cells and turns into fat and sugar. Dead milk causes allergies and other illnesses. Get your facts straight.
shredsification 4 months ago
Comment removed
shredsification 4 months ago
How could anyone drink raw milk?
IKillBabyKittensLOL 4 months ago
Wash the cows. Got it.
shoseki 4 months ago
Microbiology is a subject that I am fairly knowledgeable, so when I learned that there were individuals who ingested Raw Milk, I was confounded. As C0nc0rdance has illustrated in this video, unpasteurized milk substantially increases your susceptibility to contracting pathogenic microorganisms that cause Food-Borne Diseases.
DarthVadent2 4 months ago
First off, I have to laugh at the most ridiculous comparison of the Pufferfish vs Raw milk that just behooves me that's your argument for raw milk.
BTW, you also have to factor in the other 167 deaths, it would actually be 334 deaths (2 people die for every 167 deaths world wide= 334 dead, cause the chief kills himself, if he kills his customer by not preparing the fish correctly.
You should of did "Raw Milk VS SKY DIVING, less riskier then pufferfish more tragic if you don't pull the cord.
Inverted87 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"So the evidence that a criminal conspiracy is underway is that scientific agencies oppose your personal views? Convenient."
Your words not mine.
The fact is a whole generation of smokers perished believing smoking was healthy.
As for.
J Hyg (Lond). 1932 Apr;32(2):293-300.
What is your point, that this paper was undisputed? If so the US govt. allowed a corporation to deliberately mislead millions believing smoking was safe.
That is a pretty serious claim, and you back it up?
wjestick 4 months ago
Store milk makes me lethargic, my nose runs. Raw milk is energy in my veins, I feel great. Its called self-experimentation, its no "placebo." Try it yourself. Pasteurization makes sense where production standards are low. 19th century producers fed cows whiskey swill. Understand? Today we have wonderful farm fresh milk, the same stuff our ancestors evolved on for '000's of years, even better. Sometimes elderly and children die, no reason to punish everyone else. Only 2 dead? Really?
butlmat 4 months ago
Guess you'll have to make a video about the horrors and risks of eating Cantaloupe now. 16 Dead. How many more have to die before you speak out against the dangers of Cantaloupe...?
NO ONE CAN MAKE FOOD SAFE. FACTORY FARMING IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH OUR FOOD SUPPLY. AND YOU... ARE WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE INTERNET. DISINFORMATION AND AGENDA-PANDERING. SHAME ON YOU!
birdmanmn 4 months ago
@birdmanmn Unfortunately, given the already over-stretched food supply on the global level, and considering the fact that the human population is just going to keep growing and making the problem even more significant, large-scale, industrialized food production is probably necessary. I know there are people who will argue that the factory farms are not more productive than small ones in terms of relative numbers, but the fact is that the small farms cannot produce as much in actual numbers.
Bernstein1917 4 months ago
@birdmanmn ! YES! You have a free thinking mind and are a enlightened! The World needs more to wake up to your understanding! It's sad to see 898 likes and 64 dislikes for this video. If only the sheeple took the time to do some proper research... Fools lol
LoveEsoteric 4 months ago
A final general point. Finding good food involves trial and error. I tried raw milk, and it worked well for me. Just like early men tried all kinds of fruits, fish and berries. Some were good, others not so good. There is no reward without risk.
If even 10% of people get real health benefits from raw milk, big drugs companies would lose a lot of money, big dairies too.
Commercial necessity dictates they oppose it, no matter what the truth is, so how much can you rely on what they say?
DYOR
wjestick 4 months ago
I can't tell you there is not a risk to drinking raw milk, no more than I can tell you that you won't get an infection if you go to a hospital.
No food is universally good or bad, and lab studies are irrelevant if the food is no good to you.
Peanuts for example are a nutritious snack unless you are allergic to them, and then they are a death sentence.
My family drink raw milk, and the health benefits are real. That does not mean you should drink it.
wjestick 4 months ago
Poor guy. He is just ignorant about raw milk. Probably not stupid. Ignorant is just uneducated. Raw milk is superior when cows are grass fed. He bought into the lie. The largest outbreak of salminella was from PASTURIZED milk, infecting over 200,000 people! Raw milk has a natural antibiotic, when grass fed, that resists ecoli even! The FDA even patented this to prevent ecoli in meat plants! He needs to get educated outside of the governments grasp. So sad he made such a long video to spread lies
DiaShanti 4 months ago
I am sorry some of the views expressed have been abusive.
Your analogy is faulty. The fish is intrinsically poisonous.
Raw milk is a problem when the cattle are kept is unhealthy conditions. When they are fed unnatural fodder. When they are given growth hormone and antibiotics. In short sick cows make sick milk.
Grass fed, free range cows, with space and air are not sick. Their dung does not contain pathogens.
Clean raw milk is safer than pasteurised homogenised milk.
wjestick 4 months ago
@wjestick
I'm afraid that's not based on an examination of the facts. Take, for example, the raw milk outbreak in Pennsylvania in Feb 2008. 7 people reported illness, including one case of paralysis from Guillan Barre. The patients all tested PFGE identical for the strain of pathogenic Campylobacter found in the feces of the herd at Hendrick's Farm and Dairy, an organic, grass-fed, "mule-powered" family farm.
I don't think it's a safe assumption that bacteria are only found in sick animals.
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
Another one I just spotted is Pride and Joy Creamery, which uses only organic grass fed free-range cows this week issued a recall due to possible E Coli O157 contaminated products.
I will concede that the risk is relatively low, as with fugu, but it is still a risk. The fact that cows are grass fed or free range doesn't eliminate the risk of pathogenic bacteria, and the fact that this product is often fed to children or the elderly can result in unnecessary risk of life and health.
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
I am sure if you look hard enough you can find a few people that got sick from drinking raw milk. Maybe the farm broke the very strict rules for care and feeding of the herd.
The fact is homogenised milk has been linked to coronary heart disease. There are a lot more cases of that.
The difference is small dairies that sell raw milk own up to problems and they get fixed.
Big dairy uses lawyers and countless people get sick, remember tobacco?
wjestick 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
What is your purpose in making this video. If it is to point out the risks, most raw milk drinkers know them better than you do? I have a relationship with the farm that supplies my milk. How many pasteurised milk drinkers know where their milk comes from?
That milk can contain bacteria, puss, bovine growth hormone, and oestrogen. Pasteurisation does not clean all that out, it just kills the pathogens. All the debris and chemicals are left in there.
Learn about mainstream milk!
wjestick 4 months ago
@wjestick
What chemicals are present? How do they harm people? No specifics?
The CDC reports that raw milk drinkers are 22 times as likely to involved in a milk-born disease outbreak than non-raw milk drinkers. I think that says rather a lot, don't you?
Your original assertion was that grass-fed organic farms never had pathogens. I've shown you that this is not the case, including an outbreak THIS WEEK. It's hard to admit to a mistake, but it's good for the soul. Can you admit it?
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
Just on a side note, I'd say that you aren't that well educated on the risks of raw milk if you believe that a healthy cow can't possess human pathogens. Campylobacter spp. and E coli can be part of a healthy "grass-fed" cow's gut flora. It doesn't have to make the cow sick to make US sick.
Perhaps I've done a little educating on risks after all?
C0nc0rdance 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance
Raw milk is better than pasteurised. More vitamins, good bacteria, good cholesterol, digestive enzymes.
It needs to be clean, but that is not a function of the milk, but the dairy.
If I found a dead rat in a bottle of mineral water, I would not give up water, just demand clean water.
Hundreds drink raw milk with no ill-effects. As for your CDC figure. 22 times what? If the chance is 1 in 10,000,000 to start with, (for example) 22 times more is not much of a risk.
wjestick 4 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Even though most strains of E. Coli are harmless, in certain environmental conditions, they can evolve into more virulent strains such as the serotype E. Coli O104:H4. Which is responsible for the 2011 outbreak of Food-Borne Illness in Europe.