Raw Milk v. Raw Fish, Steak tartare, and raw oysters

[MerenthaClone]

Ecuadeedles, you don't think calling 10 million Americans a liar is inflammatory? How about sending the Gestapo to take your neighbor's food. Why is it so difficult to discuss this rationally? Why all the emotion? What's so nice about a (Insert inflammatory statement here.)

Because my job consists of caring for people who make poor health decisions caused, in part, by people like you. Your "facts" are wrong and you trot out completely made up (by your own admission) numbers, poorly and incorrectly cite statistics, and then offer up wonderful gems regarding HIV and cancer. So, yeah, I'm calling you an idiot.

And, uh, what, exactly, is so complex about raw milk, except for the vast possibilities for bacterial growth?

[rawmilkmike]

This is absolutely not what it says.

MerenthaClone, what do you think it means when the CDC says

An estimated 1.7% of raw milk consumers in Minnesota may have acquired an illness caused by foodborne pathogens each year. While 15% of Americans get sick each year from foodborne diseases.

These 2 studies go together like peanut butter and jelly. What good is a study on raw milk drinkers if you don't have something to compare it to? Did you know that none of their so called food-borne pathogens have ever been tested in raw milk to see if they can make someone sick and how much it would take if they could?

I'm inviting per review. But I need a little better explanation.

[rawmilkmike]

The lactose intolerance that effects 60% of American adults actually has absolutely nothing to do with your bodies ability to digest lactose. A resent study showed that out of 500 lactose intolerant volunteers only 16 had trouble digesting lactose. This is what is called lactose malabsorption and there is a simple test for it. Another study showed that most lactose malabsorbers were not lactose intolerant. This proves that most of what we hear about lactose intolerance is nothing but pure speculation. This is also why so many lactose intolerant people can in fact tolerate raw milk.

[Tears of Lys]

Tears of Lys, how could you possibly get cancer from sushi?

That was my reaction too, as noted by the reference to taking my mom's stories with a large container of salt.

[rawmilkmike]

Are any of those transmissible human-to-human? I don't really care if people want to risk themselves shitting blood.

Yes they are and that was my next point. I was just to lazy to check each one. Most if not all are “transmissible human-to-human”. Which means they are not really food-borne illnesses and you completely lose your linkage to raw milk. You can't have it both ways.

[all swedes are racist]

Ecuadeedles, you don't think calling 10 million Americans a liar is inflammatory? How about sending the Gestapo to take your neighbor's food. Why is it so difficult to discuss this rationally? Why all the emotion? What's so nice about a (Insert inflammatory statement here.)

Ahahahhaha ok I get it now.

Raw milk: inflame your rhetoric, not your colon!

[MerenthaClone]

MerenthaClone, what do you think it means when the CDC says

An estimated 1.7% of raw milk consumers in Minnesota may have acquired an illness caused by foodborne pathogens each year. While 15% of Americans get sick each year from foodborne diseases.

Ugh. Christ. Maybe I'll try analogy here. 1.7% of the time, playing Russian Roulette gets you shot. 15% of Americans die a year. That in no way means that playing Russian Roulette improves your chances of surviving. It only means that one, explicit activity has a 1.7% chance of giving you food poisoning, while literally every other way of getting food poisoning totals ~15%. Combining two studies like that doesn't work the way you think it does. You took two studies, with two completely different goals, and then completely made up statistical analysis (badly) to come to a conclusion. You're right, a study that looked at the average yearly rate of food poisoning and other infections between regular raw milk drinkers and people who don't drink raw milk would be good to have. There isn't that. What we do have is a study showing that raw milk usage directly causes transmission of fairly serious foodborne pathogens 1.7% of the time. A population study (drawn from a different population) showing the prevalence of food poisoning across the population. You're confusing incidence and prevalence.

Did you know that none of their so called food-borne pathogens have ever been tested in raw milk to see if they can make someone sick and how much it would take if they could?

M. bovis as a cause of TB infection has literally been almost wiped out because of pasteurization. Hope that helps.

[rawmilkmike]

Because my job consists of caring for people who make poor health decisions caused, in part, by people like you. Your "facts" are wrong and you trot out completely made up (by your own admission) numbers, poorly and incorrectly cite statistics, and then offer up wonderful gems regarding HIV and cancer. So, yeah, I'm calling you an idiot.

And, uh, what, exactly, is so complex about raw milk, except for the vast possibilities for bacterial growth?

“And, uh, what, exactly, is so complex about raw milk, except for the vast possibilities for bacterial growth? ”

Now who's the idiot?

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

Upton Beall Sinclair, Jr. (September 20 1878 – November 25 1968)

[MinDonner]

Who knew that so many BwB members were in the pay of Big Pasteurisation? I need to find out where they've been sending my salary cheques to.

[MerenthaClone]

“And, uh, what, exactly, is so complex about raw milk, except for the vast possibilities for bacterial growth? ”

Now who's the idiot?

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

Upton Beall Sinclair, Jr. (September 20 1878 – November 25 1968)

I asked you a question; you could answer. I even decided to search through some databases for you. The first result was "The complex microbiota of raw milk". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23808865 That would lead me to believe that the most complex thing about milk are the bacteria in it, eg, what I said. Nothing else really seemed to talk about raw milk being unfathomably complex. But I guess you could respond with an aphorism that doesn't really apply, because I'm not sure how my salary depends on raw milk being suppressed by the evil pasteurization conspiracy. Like I said, enlighten me.

First, M bovis, which you are "too lazy" to research, is very, very rarely spread by airborne contact. It is possible for it to do so, but compared to M. tuberculosis, very rare. It is most commonly spread via ingestion of unpasteurized milk or milk products.

[rawmilkmike]

Ugh. Christ. Maybe I'll try analogy here. 1.7% of the time, playing Russian Roulette gets you shot. 15% of Americans die a year. That in no way means that playing Russian Roulette improves your chances of surviving. It only means that one, explicit activity has a 1.7% chance of giving you food poisoning, while literally every other way of getting food poisoning totals ~15%. Combining two studies like that doesn't work the way you think it does. You took two studies, with two completely different goals, and then completely made up statistical analysis (badly) to come to a conclusion. You're right, a study that looked at the average yearly rate of food poisoning and other infections between regular raw milk drinkers and people who don't drink raw milk would be good to have. There isn't that. What we do have is a study showing that raw milk usage directly causes transmission of fairly serious foodborne pathogens 1.7% of the time. A population study (drawn from a different population) showing the prevalence of food poisoning across the population. You're confusing incidence and prevalence.

M. bovis as a cause of TB infection has literally been almost wiped out because of pasteurization. Hope that helps.

When your playing Russian Roulette and you get shot we all know it's the bullet that killed you and you can always choose not to play. You really can't choose not to eat. And you still haven't found a documented case of raw milk killing someone. A Ladysmith only holds 5 shots.

“every other way of getting food poisoning totals ~15%” These studies do not document which if any food caused these cases of diarrhea. The raw milk consumers ate other foods and 3% of Americans drink raw milk.

“incidence and prevalence”? Both are estimates using the same “under-diagnosis multipliers”.

I would imagine that M. bovis TB infections are probably caused by the same thing that causes TB in humans, a weakened immune system caused by stress and malnutrition. If you don't know what caused M. bovis TB how can you know what cured it?

[rawmilkmike]

I asked you a question; you could answer. I even decided to search through some databases for you. The first result was "The complex microbiota of raw milk". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23808865 That would lead me to believe that the most complex thing about milk are the bacteria in it, eg, what I said. Nothing else really seemed to talk about raw milk being unfathomably complex. But I guess you could respond with an aphorism that doesn't really apply, because I'm not sure how my salary depends on raw milk being suppressed by the evil pasteurization conspiracy. Like I said, enlighten me.

First, M bovis, which you are "too lazy" to research, is very, very rarely spread by airborne contact. It is possible for it to do so, but compared to M. tuberculosis, very rare. It is most commonly spread via ingestion of unpasteurized milk or milk products.

I've spent hours researching M bovis.

10 minutes to find this. Just a taste.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24700375

[rawmilkmike]

Who knew that so many BwB members were in the pay of Big Pasteurisation? I need to find out where they've been sending my salary cheques to.

10 million Americans drink raw milk for their health. That makes the $4 trillion a year medical industry raw milk's biggest competitor.

[MinDonner]

The tinfoil hattery gets stronger. So the medical industry are deliberately cooking milk to make people sicker so they can make more money?

Wow.

:lmao:

[Inigima]

rawmilkmike: Where are you on chemtrails?

[MinDonner]

I hear JFK was killed by the dairy industry because he was about to outlaw pasteurisation.

[Stannisaurus]

A resent study showed that out of 500 lactose intolerant volunteers only 16 had trouble digesting lactose.

I know, I resented that study as well. Mostly because its a non-existant/BS one.

[Lummel]

I hear JFK was killed by the dairy industry because he was about to outlaw pasteurisation.

"First they came for the raw milk drinkers..."

Pastor Niemöller

[Lord Toblerone]

Why are farmers who sell raw milk being raided by the FDA but restaraunts that serve raw fish, raw oysters, and raw beef are not? Why are adults allowed to decide to eat raw fish, raw oysters, and raw beef but not drink raw milk in many places?

I drink and cook with raw milk. I tell people the things I make are made with raw milk before I serve them. Should my actions be illegal? My brother-in-law makes sushi (excellent sushi) at home, should his actions be illegal?

I'm from a dairy farm, I've drunk raw milk my whole life. It's fine. But we get it fresh, obviously.

Plus, I'm in Ireland. There are pretty good controls in place against diseases. I don't how good the measures are elsewhere.

[Aemon Stark]

3) To say there is no cure for psoriasis, is no different then saying the average American gets diarrhea 4 times a year. There is no cure until you find one. How is it you know more about raw milk then the CDC? Raw milk is the most complex food known to man. HIV doesn't exist and cancer is an immune deficiency.

You don't deserve our further consideration here, having shown yourself to be an HIV-denialist. Go peddle your conspiracy theories and ignorance elsewhere.