Is there any benefit to raw milk vs pasteurized milk?

[Minimalist]

Vitamins are what nature puts in food to make it taste bad.

[KUSA]

This whole debate is needless. Let's just make human breast milk socially acceptable for adults to consume. Just think of the good it could do. Prostitution would no longer be the only way women could sell their bodies and it could bring families closer together.

---

I won funniest member. I can say whatever I damn well please now.

---

I have consumed gallons of raw milk (all human). I think it's great.

[Creed of Heresy]

This whole debate is needless. Let's just make human breast milk socially acceptable for adults to consume. Just think of the good it could do. Prostitution would no longer be the only way women could sell their bodies and it could bring families closer together.

---

I won funniest member. I can say whatever I damn well please now.

---

I have consumed gallons of raw milk (all human). I think it's great.

...Gross.

---

I'm lactose-intolerant so raw milk would probably make me combust spontaneously.

I prefer almond milk anyway.

Almond milk is the shiiiiit~

---

This whole debate is needless. Let's just make human breast milk socially acceptable for adults to consume. Just think of the good it could do. Prostitution would no longer be the only way women could sell their bodies and it could bring families closer together.

---

I won funniest member. I can say whatever I damn well please now.

---

GROOOSSSSS! DX<

[KichigaiNeko]

Only benefit thar I can understand is that you get higher "butter fats" (which makes it yummy) and the potential to die from a preventable disease.

[Creed of Heresy]

You can't kill a vitamin.

I read somewhere that pasteurization reduces vitamins and minerals found in raw milk, but I suppose you are correct.

http://renuarorard.com/blog/myth-pasteur...s-in-milk/

Yeah it was a desperate claim by the new age hippies to try to legitimize their psychotic obsession to organic that they want to go so far as to make the food process more expensive, less efficient, and less sanitary because they believe a bunch of bullshit about how "non-organic food" (whatever the fuck THAT means...) is less healthy, less flavorful, far more dangerous than "organic food" (again i have no idea what the fuck that means, whoever coined these terms doesn't fucking understand what organic even means it seems)... FUNNY THING. Those e. coli outbreaks sure happen a lot to that "safer, healthier" food... And have you ever seen the organic section? The fruit is pathetic, tiny, and tastes inferior. Get an organic beefsteak tomato and a normal beefsteak tomato, have someone chop them up without telling you which side has which tomato, and try them both. As Penn & Teller showed, in all likelihood you'll find the "non-organic: tomato juicier and tastier.

Now they want to distribute raw milk? They want MORE risk of e. coli outbreaks? Fuck these stupid-ass hippies and these obnoxious hipster-ass yuppie soccer moms and these unwashed redneck hicks who DURN'T WURNT THUR GUVURNMURNT TER TURK DEHRR JUUUURBS because they're too cheap to spring for having their product taken to a pasteurization facility.

Basically, they're farmer jews.

[Cato]

The health risks associated with drinking raw milk is likely overstated by the CDC in the U.S.

Perhaps this is a good time to review the difference between absolute and relative risk. When you hear that you have a roughly 9 times greater (relative) risk of getting sick from drinking raw milk than pasteurized milk, that might sound scary. And indeed it would be, if we were talking about the absolute risk moving from 5% to 45%.

But when the absolute risk is extremely small, as it is here, a relative 9-fold increase is rather insignificant. If you have a 0.00011 percent chance of getting sick from drinking pasteurized milk, and a 9.4 times greater risk of getting sick from drinking unpasteurized milk, we’re still talking about a miniscule risk of 0.00106% (one one-thousandth of a percent).

http://chriskresser.com/raw-milk-reality...-dangerous

Also, and I think more alarming, is the fact that the U.S. government is wasting time and money setting up sting operations to harass small farmers. In the Allgyer case, an Amish farmer was forced to shut down his farm for selling across a state line (Pennsylvania to Maryland).

In FDA's view all raw milk is a communicable disease and is "adulterated"; so, a product that is legal to sell under the laws of two neighboring states is a "communicable disease" and illegal when it crosses from one neighboring state into another. The federal ban on raw milk is a prohibition on a product that is legal to sell or distribute in at least twenty-nine (29) states and legal to consume in all fifty (50).

http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/aa/aa-26april2010.htm

[Zen Badger]

A lady I used to work with had a cow whose calf had died and she would bring the raw milk in to work.

It tasted wonderful, far better IMHO than store bought milk.

I can't comment on the health benefits/risks except to say that no one got ill from drinking that particular batch.

[Jacob(smooth)]

The problem is this. Whenever anything goes wrong, when somebody contracts anything nasty, everyone starts looking for someone to blame. How could "they" let this happen. Lawsuits ensue.

But then when the government identifies a risk and try to protect people from it, it's big government / pharma / business trying to crush the little guy.

---

A lady I used to work with had a cow whose calf had died and she would bring the raw milk in to work.

It tasted wonderful, far better IMHO than store bought milk.

I can't comment on the health benefits/risks except to say that no one got ill from drinking that particular batch.

I used to smoke. It was great, I really liked it and I had no health problems. In fact I was healthier then than I am now!

I know people who smoked and lived to their 80s, never had any problems.

Oh and I sent a 63 year old for a below knee amputation last week because his arteries were borked from smoking.

The reason we have groups like the doh and the Fda is they gather more than anecdotes. The plural of anecdote is NOT data.

[Cato]

The problem is this. Whenever anything goes wrong, when somebody contracts anything nasty, everyone starts looking for someone to blame. How could "they" let this happen. Lawsuits ensue.

But then when the government identifies a risk and try to protect people from it, it's big government / pharma / business trying to crush the little guy.

In the case of raw milk, what is the government protecting people from? If the risk threshold for raw milk consumption requires government intervention then the government should be stopping other activity that poses higher risk of injury/mortality such as driving or flying. This makes government involvement seem arbitrary.

I'm certainly ok with the FDA or the CDC conducting the appropriate studies and providing guidance; however, if the results don't suggest a public health risk, why criminalize at the federal level across state lines that which is legal in any particular state?

[TaraJo]

Well, as for taste, I prefer skim milk anyway, so I can't imagine them skimming the milk fat out without homogenizing in the proces, so that's out. I can't imagine drinking raw, skim milk.

As for almond or soy milk, those are good, solid vegan or lactose intolerant alternatives. I'm not saying whether they're bad or good, but talking about them kinda forces you to talk about veganism altogether which is a whole different subject. I did have some vegans insisting to me that all humans are lactose intolerant and that milk is poison to all of us and that sounded kinda batty and contradicted everything I've learned about milk over the past few years (that stuff is filled with all kinds of awesome vitamins and lactose is a very healthy sugar/energy source).