Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 10 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Make raw milk products available
Published 06:00 a.m., July 1, 2009
My entire family would like to see raw milk and raw milk products available to the public. It is far more healthful than the cooked, and homoganized stuff passed off as milk. It should absolutely be up to we the citizenry to decide what kind of milk we want to drink.
This prohibition has gone on long enough. At least if the federal ban on interstate travel and sales is ended, we could order it sent in to us. It's a big step in the right direction.
Sharon Donohue
Pelican Rapids
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?



Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post. To post a comment you will need to register. Or, if you're already registered but have not included your true, verifiable identity with your registration, you will need to update your account to include your identity. Effective Dec. 1, 2009, all posts appear with the commenter's true identity, which must be verified by site staff. Those who registered prior to Dec. 1, 2009, should be aware that once you update your information with your true identity, all prior posts under your user name will also indicate your true identity. If you do not wish to link yourself to prior comments, you should register again with a different user name.Posted by Mel (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We, at one time could buy pasteurized milk that was not homogenized. I would buy if it was made available.
You should not drink raw milk, to many chances of getting sick.
Posted by Tim123 (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Although you can get believable arguments from both sides of this issue, my opinion is that some of the claims, good and bad, may be slightly embellished to further the cause. With that said, there does seem to be some evidence that raw milk may be healthier for a number of reasons. It seems logical to me, given that most natural products are healthier before refinement or treatment. That is really the foundation that organic agriculture has been built around. Whether raw or not, at the very least I would advocate drinking organically produced milk. It's hard to argue that milk from a grass fed, antibiotic free, open pastured cow isn't better for you than milk from a factory farm cow. I know a lot of farmers want to disagree with that for economic reasons, and I completely understand their position. But given a choice, I'll take the organic every time. And now, maybe, raw.
Posted by Callie25 (Tracy Chaput) on July 1, 2009 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is a reason why you cannot buy raw milk. Unless you have grown up consuming and developed a certain immunity to the pathogens that all raw milk contains, you will get sick. Some of those pathogens are very dangerous. Tuberculosis can be transmitted by raw milk and it has been showing up more and more in Northern MN. You wouldn't catch me drinking it.
Posted by metasonics (Jamie Cooper) on July 1, 2009 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
whats wrong with antibiotics?
antibiotics kill bacteria, and have added many years to the average human life expectancy, so why should we be afraid to consume animal products that were treated with antibiotics?
obviously feeding cattle pesticide treated grass or something of that nature would be stupid but antibiotics kill bacteria, I don't need any parasites.
from wikipedia:
Louis Pasteur was best known to the general public for inventing a method to stop milk and wine from causing sickness - this process came to be called Pasteurization
Unlike sterilization, pasteurization is not intended to kill all pathogenic micro-organisms in the food or liquid. Instead, pasteurization aims to reduce the number of viable pathogens so they are unlikely to cause disease (assuming the pasteurization product is refrigerated and consumed before its expiration date.
how is any of this a bad thing? the farmers aren't giving their animals antibiotics and pasteurizing their milk, to screw you over.
Posted by Tim123 (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There's a lot of debate on whether antibiotics and other drugs used on livestock is harmful to humans. One thing to remember though is that antibiotics used on animals are not necessarily the same kind used with humans. Some for-animal antibiotics are known carcinogens in humans. Others have some level of toxicity.
I think the reason that I'm concerned about antibiotics and other drugs in my food supply is that there is so much that is unknown about it. It was only a few decades ago that DDT and other chemicals were in widespread use with the assurances from chemical companies and government that it was perfectly safe. I can remember city officials in the town I lived in, spraying clouds of mosquito killing chemicals around public places years ago with no regard whatsoever to the fact that we were breathing it in. Our soldiers in Vietnam were told the same thing about Agent Orange. Now of course, we all know better. My point is that I don't want to consume meat with trace amounts of supposedly harmless chemicals in it only to find out 10 years from now they have been linked to cancer. If it can be made more natural, it can only be a good thing for the consumer.
Posted by Mel (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What about genetic altered plants? Corn that worms can't live on, Soybeans that can be sprayed with round up, I can't see how that could be good for us. Some other countries won't let these seeds into their farms.
Posted by Tim123 (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 1:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mel, in the sense that technology moves faster than our complete understanding of what we've done, I agree with you. Genetic manipulation beyond natures natural process could lead to health risks if we don't properly test. I worry that proper testing often goes by the wayside in the rush to gain competitive advantage by being first to market. There's plenty of history to support my fear.
Round up ready anything worries me, because it means that it will be ok to spray round up directly on to plants instead of on weeds before planting or before seeds germinate. Chemical companies tell farmers that round up is safe and is gone 5 days or so after application. I'm skeptical. I was shocked to discover years ago that round up was regularly sprayed on wheat to kill it to speed up the harvest. So round up was sprayed on the wheat kernels that make up my cereal and bread? I really don't like that idea much. It doesn't sound healthy to me.
The more I learn, the more I like organically grown food.
Posted by RockTruck (anonymous) on July 6, 2009 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It looks like some people do not understand what pasteurizing and homogenizing means, so I'll help.
Pasteurizing is basically lightly boiling it. Homogenizing is basically chopping the butterfat into smaller pieces so that the butterfat doesn't rise to the top of the milk.
If you are against something this basic, well, then throw away your stove and blender because these are evil in your mind as well.
Back to drinking raw milk.... IF you are sure that your cow(s) are bangs free, then you could drink the raw milk. Otherwise, pasteurize it.
Posted by akmscott (Mike Scott) on July 6, 2009 at 3:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The litigation riske are too great!Everyone wants free money!
Posted by mccain08 (anonymous) on July 9, 2009 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
buy a cow, suckle teat, problem solved.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)
You may also register to comment in our forums at www.fergusfeedback.com.