Comments on: Pasteurization Does Harm Real Milk

By: Bill Pickersgill

Bill Pickersgill — Sat, 02 Nov 2019 16:21:24 +0000

Vitamin D is stable in heat so normal pasteurization would not hurt the nutrient value at all .

By: Bill Pickersgill

Bill Pickersgill — Sat, 02 Nov 2019 16:18:10 +0000

In reply to Lisa. Those substitutes you mention don't have saturated fat in them nor taurine or iodine they are no good . The reason it's called milk is because you milk the animals teet's .

By: Lisa

Lisa — Tue, 27 Aug 2019 05:31:43 +0000

Raw milk doesn’t effect me negatively, and it tastes better than Pasteurized milk. I’m severely lactose intolerant with regular milk, and even with lactose-free milk it’s a little bit better, but both lactose-free milk or even goat milk still effect me negatively. I’ve tried soy milk and rice milk, and both are fine, but soy is just a bit thick, rice milk seems too watery, and I don’t like the taste of almond milk. I’ve never had issues with Raw milk when I’ve had it.

By: Webmaster Realmilk.com

Webmaster Realmilk.com — Fri, 23 Aug 2019 01:55:23 +0000

In reply to David. I don't see that anywhere he is comparing the effects of pasteurization on growing infants and calves to its effects on grown adults. This article is primarily focused on the nutritional value of raw vs. pasteurized specifically when it comes to infants. Many infants do not thrive on pasteurized milk or milk replacer products, which is why our raw milk formula is so popular with desperate mothers who are unable to make enough breastmilk and whose babies don't thrive on commercial formula (literally, many described with the term "failure to thrive" have thrived once put on our raw milk formula). This site is full of articles about safe production of raw milk. Like any other food, if not produced and handled safely it could cause food-borne illness. Both raw milk and pasteurized milk are very safe relative to other foods as we've pointed out many times on this site (raw oysters, deli meat, salad greens, etc. are all potentially dangerous). I agree that readers should not take advice at face value. Look up the references in the scientific literature. We annotate our articles to help you do that.

By: Webmaster Realmilk.com

Webmaster Realmilk.com — Fri, 23 Aug 2019 01:34:44 +0000

In reply to David. Except for the thousands of farmers listed on this site who work all day on their "real" dairies (maybe you think they're too small to be "real"?) to offer raw milk and drink it themselves.

By: David

David — Sun, 02 Jun 2019 16:57:40 +0000

In reply to stewartinoz. Finally, someone commenting that has practical, real world experience and isn't just blowing smoke out of there ass. The general public is so removed from their food sources. I imagine I would be hard pressed to find someone who spent a day working on a real dairy reject pasteurization afterward.

By: David

David — Sun, 02 Jun 2019 16:54:24 +0000

I would recommend you look up your state’s standards for what is considered “commercial grade milk.” I would be willing to bet that if this person isn’t being monitored by the state or processors that his milk is sub standard. Have you asked your local dairyman if he/she tests his milk for what the bacterial and coliform count is? Did he/she explain to you what the process is that he/she uses? What temp, how long?

By: David

David — Sun, 02 Jun 2019 16:48:21 +0000

Well first of all Dr. Irons, your first argument is pretty flawed. You cannot compare the effects of pasteurization on growing infants and calves to its effects on grown adults who no longer need to rely on the chemical properties of milk for growth and development. I enjoy dairy myself but it isn’t such a large percentage of my dietary protein or fat intake (or anyone’s for that matter) that I need to concern myself with not getting enough milk protein, which we actually don’t need as adults if people would just eat well. Secondly, both young animals and young people do thrive on pasteurized milk, colostrum, and even milk replacer products. I think we as humans, and especially humans living in a first world country, are experiencing an interesting time in history. We have become so technologically advanced that we have forgotten about a past when men, women, and children suffered regularly from food borne illness, a large portion of them from the consumption of dairy products. Today we have the luxury of rejecting processes such as pasteurization and vaccinating (I’m not comparing the two) because we seldom see, if at all, the effects of a time when these processes weren’t available to us. The fact of the matter is this: people do not consume so much dairy that they need to concern themselves with a few denatured whey proteins. Furthermore, milk does contain harmful pathogens that can make a person or child very very ill. Weigh the odds, drink something that is nutritious and could hurt you (raw milk) or drink something that is also very nutritious and is very safe (conventional pasteurized milk). It’s a fad that even scientists are buying into. I would ask that you spend a little time on some dairies, in the lab, and over the microscope. I would also add to the readers, don’t take advice at face value, look up the science yourselves! It’s out there for free!

By: Webmaster Realmilk.com

Webmaster Realmilk.com — Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:41:17 +0000

In reply to stewartinoz. Sally Fallon Morell replies: The goal is to have tens of thousands of boutique raw milk farmers in the US. Every family will have connections to a farm. This is the wave of the future. There will also be plenty of medium sized dairies, such as Organic Pastures at 400 cows. After all, America was fed with milk from dairies these sizes for decades.

By: stewartinoz

stewartinoz — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 01:07:21 +0000

Hi Sally,
Your comments about milk production from Organic Pastures illustrates my previous points. If this had been for the total milk for retail to the USA population, I would have been impressed but you only cite one example. I spoke to a lady there but she could not supply more specifics. So from their Web site, it would seem they fall into the category I described as Boutique. Which returns to my original comments, that for most milk from general production for retail to the general public, pasteurisation provides a level of safety from disease that Raw Milk does not.
In the 50’s Scotland was on Steam Sterilisation at the farm level, the bacterial standard for Raw milk, water cooled to below 60°F in cans was by Standard Plate Count and Coliform delivered to the processing plants. I cannot remember the details but they were discussed with envy in Victoria in the 70’s when they were contemplating changing from Methylene Blue to Thermoduric Count or <30,000 per ml.
If you want a historic run through, I will email you directly.