Tag Archives: Milk

Milk — kudos to a government-type explaining what they do

Posted on by
1

Terrence Philibeck, Director, Dairy Inspection Division Indiana State Board of Animal Health Indianapolis, writes to the Indianapolis Star in reference to Shari Rudasky’s article ("Four ways to shop smart," Oct. 16)

Philibeck says that to tell consumers to check their dairy products for hormones is misleading. All milk contains naturally occurring hormones produced by lactating animals. Labeling as "hormone-free" reflects only the absence of synthetic hormones given to the cows, a practice that will be virtually eliminated by year-end as a result of new industry-imposed policies.

Second, to recommend consumers seek out antibiotic-free products is simply a marketing gimmick. All fluid milk is tested for the presence of antibiotics before it is processed. Milk that tests positive for antibiotic residues is discarded as unfit for human consumption. To recommend consumers seek out antibiotic-free-labeled milk is to imply that other products are somehow contaminated or unsafe, when in fact all dairy products must abide by this industry standard for safety.

As the state’s regulatory agency for dairy products, the Indiana State Board of Animal Health has a compliance and education program to help producers avoid contamination of milk through the use of antibiotics in their herd. Producers who violate the antibiotic-negative requirement must complete a 10-point action plan with their herd veterinarian and are subject to fines for repeated occurrences. Our staff also works with dairy processors and cooperatives (the wholesalers) to verify that regular testing is done routinely and correctly to ensure the wholesomeness of our dairy supply.

How hard was that? It’s rarely done. Instead, government and industry folks are usually content to make pronouncements about the ignorant masses, in meetings or sometimes in public. American culture is awash in food porn and hucksterism. It’s up to those who manage risks to communicate with the public they serve. I wrote a book about it, Mad Cows and Mother’s Milk. Kudos to Terrence Philibeck.

CBS confuses raw, probiotic

Posted on by
4

CBS News did a puff piece tonight on probiotics and somehow equated the beneficial bacteria in fermented products like yoghurt with the bacteria found in raw milk. I’m not sure salmonella, campylobacter, listeria and E. coli O157:H7 would count as probiotics.

 I’m not sure the kids sickened in all the outbreaks linked to raw milk would think they got a load of beneficial bacteria.

Raw milk rally

Posted on by
Reply

Sally Fallon surfaced on Tuesday (Sept. 18/07) in Pennsylvania alongside state agriculture hearings on raw milk.

Fallon, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, which she described to Lancaster Farming as the largest proponent of raw milk sales in the U.S., didn’t actually testify at the hearings, but did speak at an associated rally, saying that she is against the use of permits when it comes to raw milk sales in any state, so long as the cows used to get the milk from are grassfed.

Why grassfed?

It is commonly but erroneously stated that grassfed cattle have little or no verotoxigenic E. coli like O157:H7. One such advocate, Nina Planck, wrote at the height of the fall 2006 E. coli O157:H7 spinach outbreak in the N.Y. Times that E. coli O157:H7,

"is not found in the intestinal tracts of cattle raised on their natural diet of grass, hay and other fibrous forage. … It’s the infected  manure from these grain-fed cattle that contaminates the groundwater  and spreads the bacteria to produce, like spinach, growing on  neighboring farms."

That’s not just wrong, it’s dangerous. The natural reservoirs for E. coli O157:H7 and other verotoxigenic E. coli is the intestines of all ruminants, including cattle — grass or grain-fed — sheep, goats, deer and the like. The final report of the fall 2006 spinach outbreak identifies nearby grass-fed beef cattle as the likely source of the E. coli O157:H7 that sickened 200 and killed 4.

As my colleague David Renter wrote in Sept. 2006,

"Cattle raised on diets of “grass, hay and other fibrous forage” do contain E. coli O157:H7 bacteria in their feces as do other animals including deer, sheep, goats, bison, opossum, raccoons, birds, and many others.

"Cattle diet can affect levels of  E. coli O157:H7, but this is a complex issue that has been and continues to be studied by many scientists.  To suggest switching cattle from grain to forage based on a small piece of the scientific evidence is inappropriate and irresponsible.  Several pieces of evidence suggest that such a change would not eliminate and may even increase E. coli O157:H7 in cattle. 

"The current spinach outbreak may be traced back to cattle manure, but there are many other potential sources.  Simplistically attacking one facet of livestock production may be politically expedient, but instead provides a false sense of security and ignores the biological realities of E. coli O157:H7. In 1999, for example, 90 children were felled by E. coli O157:H7 at a fair in London, Ont. The source? A goat at a petting zoo, hardly an intensively farmed animal."

Fallon also told the rally it is the “constitutional right” of a farmer and their customer to enter into private contracts when it comes to raw milk sales and that the government has no right to intrude.

Sure. But government does have a responsibility to protect the vulnerable members of society — especially children.

Show me the data: raw milk and raw cider are both dangerous

Posted on by
1

North Carolina state epidemiologist Jeffrey Engel, MD, told the Greensboro News Record today that,

"Raw milk is a product of animals, and as such, is much more likely than apple cider to be contaminated with animal pathogens that can make people sick."

Except animals, especially deer, love to hang  out and crap in apple orchards,

Risk comparisons are risky in the absence of references.

Don’t eat your make-up

Posted on by
Reply

Just in case you had any ideas about it, Dairy Foods Safety Victoria took the time to point out that cosmetic products should not be used for human consumption.

The advisory is for several cosmetic dairy products on the market in Australia that customers may be tempted to consume as food. 

In the article, Anne Astin, CEO of DFSV, mentioned that these cosmetic products were not pasteurized. The sale of these products as food, therefore, would violate Australian law.

“Pasteurisation is important as it involves heating the dairy product to a high temperature for a short time which kills or inactivates all pathogens such as E.coli, Salmonella and Listeria," said Astin, also including that, "Pasteurisation has little effect on the flavour or nutritional value of the milk.” Way to sneak it in there, Astin.

iFSN believes that pasteurized milk is safer milk. And while we say you should consume your dairy products in whatever manner you’d like (provided you’re not giving a dangerous product to your children), we ask that you not ingest your make-up. It just seems wrong.

This one tastes like the cow got into an onion patch

Posted on by
Reply

Two health advisories, a feature and charcoal. Just another Friday night for raw milk, which I told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, is a trend embraced by an affluent, food-obsessed culture.

Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff said this evening that consumers who purchased raw milk from the Amos B. King dairy farm in Blain, Perry County, any time after Aug. 21, should discard it immediately due to the risk of campylobacterosis contamination.

Later this evening, the California Department of Food and Agriculture issued an order to Organic Pastures Dairy Company to withdraw from retail distribution Grade A raw cream manufactured at their facility in Fresno, due to detection of Listeria monocytogenes bacteria and ordered the company to stop producing raw cream for the retail market.

Meanwhile, the North Carolina Board of Agriculture unanimously voted today to require unpasteurized milk sold as pet food to be dyed a charcoal-gray color and labeled as not for human consumption.

Good thing too. As John Kessler of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today,  at least one Atlanta store has raw milk in its dairy case. Cabbagetown Market, a funky grocer, stocks it right next to artisanal cheese and pullet eggs. Owner Lisa Hanson says she has gotten the go-ahead from Georgia Department of Agriculture to sell the milk, as it is labeled "not for human consumption."
Tell that to Suzanne Welander of Atlanta, who drinks the milk she buys there. "I like it for the quality," she enthuses. "It’s a really creamy product and I enjoy knowing how it was raised."

Douglas Powell of Kansas State University said,

"If adults want to do it, fine," shrugs Powell, who publishes barfblog, which deals with food safety issues. "But the evidence is fairly clear in terms of links to illnesses from raw milk, and the arguments [touting its health benefits] are largely disingenuous. … Don’t expose your kids to your dietary weirdness."

A table of raw-milk related outbreaks is available at:
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu/en/article-details.php?a=1&c=1&sc=1&id=384

I’ll have a brown cow … hold the charcoal

Posted on by
Reply

The North Carolina Board of Agriculture will consider a proposal Friday to require raw, unpasteurized milk, legally sold in the state as "pet food" (as in Dr. Evil saying, "lasers") be labeled "not for human consumption" and dyed charcoal.

The story says that the dying requirement is aimed at discouraging people who buy "pet milk" but use it on the dinner table or in making cheese.

The story also notes that a bill in the same N.C. legislature sponsored by Sen. Kay Hagan would allow consumers to enter into contractual arrangements with farmers known as "cow shares" to get raw milk.

Hagan, a Greensboro Democrat, was quoted as saying, "I can’t imagine the government intruding into someone’s refrigerator like this."

Unless it’s spinach or lettuce or tomatoes or anything else making people poop and barf, then Democrats are the first to say the government needs to get into the refrigerator.

I credit mine to berries and beer

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of twists in the latest feature on the popularity of raw milk in this morning’s Miami Herald.

"Raw milk is also popular among Libertarians, who believe the government does not have the right to regulate what they consume, and among evangelical Christians who adhere to The Maker’s Diet, a Bible-based diet of unprocessed food."

The story also quotes Dennis Stoulfouz, a father of three who was raised in Pennsylvania Amish country and is now a Florida farmer with 20 cows, as saying about raw milk:

"I credit it to my energy, my stamina, my libido, my mental clarity.”

 

A tale of two drinks?

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. Suzanne Gibbons-Burgener, from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, was cited as telling the annual International Conference on Diseases in Nature Communicable to Man held last week in Madison, Wisconsin that a random sampling of milk from 901 Wisconsin dairy farms, chosen to encompass small and large herds, producers of Grade A and B milk, and all five of the state’s geographic regions, found that 76 per cent of the samples had detectable Coxiella burnetii DNA, and 5 per cent of the samples harbored Listeria monocytogenes.

Milk from larger herds and farms producing Grade A milk appeared to have a larger risk of having detectable C. burnetii, but no clear risk factors emerged to predict which farms were more likely to have L. monocytogenes in their milk. Both bacteria were broadly distributed geographically.

Kim White writes in a letter to the Owen Sound Sun Times in Ontario, Canada, that the real issue with raw milk is about the prevention of illness and not about freedom of choice, stating,

"Do not talk to me about what is or is not an issue of freedom to choose when 75 per cent of what is in the grocery store now contains genetically modified ingredients – without labelling, without warning. … Health Canada and the FDA, I’m afraid, exist to protect the industry they serve."

Roll over, Louis

Posted on by
4

In a press release that would leave Pasteur guffawing, Autumn Valley Farm of Worcester, N.Y. has declared that it will be resuming sales of raw milk.

Co-owner Lori McGrath was quoted as saying,

"… everyone understands that the state has to be pacified because the Agriculture Department is deathly afraid that any kind of an outbreak will hurt the commercial milk industry."

Sally Fallon, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, which is bankrolling many of the state initiatives to promote raw milk was quoted as saying,

“Raw milk from small family-run farms is immediately refrigerated after milking and is typically sold within a day or two – the freshest milk you can find. I’m hoping that these unnecessary contamination alerts will stop with a little education at the state level.”

A call for education usually means propaganda.  Louis Pasteur would be entertained to learn that dangerous microorganisms have political affiliations and avoid small family-run farms. As Brae and I have noted, outbreaks, usually involving children consuming raw milk, continue unabated.