Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Raw milk

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    jonnyrudyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭jonnyrudyard


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    people have lived on raw milk.
    That is your claim. You again provide no evidence. No offense and no tit-for-tat intended; I simply don't believe something just because someone says it on the internet.
    in fact, doctors used to prescribe it back in the early 1900s.
    They also handed out morphine and cocaine like it was baby aspirin. Sorry, but even if your claim is true, that doesn't exactly support your defense of raw milk's "medicinal properties."
    sorry for not wanting to write a term paper for you on here.
    Good, because I wasn't asking for one. Just asking you to provide evidence to support your claim. Since you cannot, I see little reason why anyone would believe it. But as you say, to each their own.
    your stuck in your belief system.
    :rolleyes: My "belief system" is believing in things which are proven or at least have strong evidence to back them. Your claims made here so far don't qualify that I can see.
    i choose my battles these days, and you are not one of them. no matter what i say, or what proof i give you...you will still tell me i am wrong.
    That might apply if you in fact gave any proof. Again I see none.

    PS I am not interested in a "battle." Only that you back your claims. If you want to say "I don't have any evidence but I believe it's so anyway" and we just agree to disagree, fine, say so. But to act like something is fact when no evidence exists and even evidence exists to the contrary makes little if any sense, and that appears to be the case here.
    have fun drinking and eating your dead dairy. do mother cows pasteurize their milk before giving it to the calf
    Which might be relevant if people were calves.
    pasteurization was designed to kill harmful bacteria
    Which it does.
    it also kills almost all the good in the milk.
    Another inaccurate claim with no basis in fact and plenty of evidence to the contrary.

    See what I mean?
    it has been documented that an american man lived solely on raw milk for 42 years. in this time, he was NEVER sick. there are modern day stories of people doing the same thing and their health actually got better.
    Sure they did. You once again provide no evidence of a claim, so I hope you'll understand that I'm more than a little skeptical, esp since the claim is frankly not very believable anyway. Milk is far from a "perfect food" as it does not by itself have all the nutrients/etc an adult needs.
    by the way, im untrollable
    I have no idea what that means or why it's relevant, but congrats. And excuse me for daring to ask you to back your claims and when you fail to do so, deciding that believing them for no reason whatsoever is not the smartest thing to do.


  • Options
    #93
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    mod, can you put an end to this please?


  • Options
    #94
    The Hill Billy
    Registered Users Posts: 22,778 ✭✭✭✭The Hill Billy


    To be honest, the previous poster has raised some valid points about the arguments that you put forward. I see no reason to lock the thread because you are unwilling or unable to respond.

    tHB


  • Options
    #95
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    IR wrote: »
    For comparison for those who insist on published data in peer reviewed journals, another set of data was compiled by Stephen P. Oliver and others entitled "Food Safety Hazards Associated with Consumption of Raw milk, published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease.3 Oliver looked at illnesses attributed to raw milk over a nine-year period, 2000 to 2008, as shown in Figure 2. The numbers listed are those attributed to drinking fluid milk, and do not include illnesses attributed to other processed dairy products.

    I had a look at that article. I see the concluding sentence of the author's summary says:

    One sure way to prevent raw milk–associated foodborne illness is for consumers to refrain from drinking raw milk and from consuming dairy products manufactured using raw milk.

    LC


  • Options
    #96
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    The author of the article also states

    This increased demand has intensified the raw milk debate. En- hanced nutritional qualities, taste, and health benefits have all been advocated as reasons for raw milk consumption. However, science-based data to substantiate these claims are lacking or do not exist.

    LC


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    did you know the queen of england has a herd of jersey cows she uses for her own raw milk? she gave it to charles and william all the time as kids. explains why she and her husband are 86 and 92, yet still motor around like they are 55. would the queen put herself in danger? she has nothing to prove. not that i need her approval. my own is good enough. but this is one of the most influential people in the world. doesn't that tell you something? and she doesn't preach about it. its just a known fact. also, when she visited ireland, mcaleese presented her with a raw cheese platter. i dont know of many 86 and 92 year olds even alive, let alone ones that are so full of energy.


  • Options
    #98
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    IR wrote: »
    Quote from the article so that everyone else can see that it was in fact not just pulling numbers from thin air!
    For comparison for those who insist on published data in peer reviewed journals, another set of data was compiled by Stephen P. Oliver and others entitled "Food Safety Hazards Associated with Consumption of Raw milk, published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease.3 Oliver looked at illnesses attributed to raw milk over a nine-year period, 2000 to 2008, as shown in Figure 2. The numbers listed are those attributed to drinking fluid milk, and do not include illnesses attributed to other processed dairy products.

    If you look at the spreadsheet near the bottom, you will see the calculations have been done in relation to the number of raw milk drinkers in the population, not just based on the 3m drinkers vs approx 300mill pop...

    Once again IR, this article tends to undermine rather than support your arguments. http://img.pr.com/release-file/1004/228127/2009OliverFoodbornePathogensa.pdf

    I attach the Table - Table 5 I take it?. If we use your figures of 3m raw milk drinkers vs 300 million pasteurised milk drinkers which seem reasonable estimates for N America, then there are 100 times more people drinking raw milk.

    This means that rather than seeing 33 cases of say Campylobacter poisoning in raw milk drinkers and 1 in pasteurised milk drinkers, we should consider this a raw milk drinkers having 3300 times the risk (based on this data).

    I could go on.

    Your "research" should move away from this paper - like raw milk, it is not good for you!

    LostCovey


  • Options
    #99
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    so are fags good for you? why are they legal? oh thats right, because they are profitable as anything AND they make people sick, which stimulates the economy by making healthcare industries and big pharma more money. it's all down to personal choice...why not for raw milk?


  • Options
    #100
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    dude, google how many people get sick per year from raw milk or salmonella from raw eggs.

    Google it yourself.
    tribesman44 wrote: »
    i eat both all the time. and you can get sick from any food which isn't regulated properly.

    I agree. That is the core of the argument here, and argument by you & your fellow raw milk campaigners for weakening the safeguards.
    tribesman44 wrote: »
    i got food poisoning before from a feckin sausage.

    Try pork the next time, and cook it.
    tribesman44 wrote: »
    you can live off raw milk by itself...you cannot live off pasteurized milk by itself. doesn't that tell you something?

    It tells me something alright - that either
    a. you really belief this kind of guff
    or
    b. you are not serious.

    LC


  • Options
    #101
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    yes i saw the website. i filled out the petition and i follow them on facebook. at least someone is trying.

    Good man.

    And keep quoting Darina Allen, and persisiting against all the evidence with repetitive arguments in online forums - I think that just about covers about everything that the Raw Milk campaign's PR gurus are advising.

    Lost Covey


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    simple solution, if you dont like raw milk then dont drink it. i dont like fags and alcohol, and i dont buy them. but i dont walk around telling people they should or shouldnt have them.


  • Options
    #103
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    simple solution, if you dont like raw milk then dont drink it. i dont like fags and alcohol, and i dont buy them. but i dont walk around telling people they should or shouldnt have them.

    As I suspected, you really don't understand the problem. What pastueurisation protects you against is infectious disease. If you catch something from raw milk, you could infect someone else. Also a child could get hold of raw milk that you buy for your own consumption - the law has to protect the innocent victims of your reckless behaviour.

    LC


  • Options
    #104
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    Good man.

    And keep quoting Darina Allen, and persisiting against all the evidence with repetitive arguments in online forums - I think that just about covers about everything that the Raw Milk campaign's PR gurus are advising.

    Lost Covey

    i never read any of darina allen's quotes, nor do i care what she or anyone has to say about it. i like raw milk, it makes me feel good and i should be able to buy it and drink it if i want. just admit the world is completely backwards. there has to be some alterior motive to making it illegal.

    and also, have you yourself had raw milk? or are you just rambling about everyone elses opinions?


  • Options
    #105
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    did you know the queen of england has a herd of jersey cows she uses for her own raw milk? she gave it to charles and william all the time as kids. explains why she and her husband are 86 and 92, yet still motor around like they are 55. would the queen put herself in danger? she has nothing to prove. not that i need her approval. my own is good enough. but this is one of the most influential people in the world. doesn't that tell you something? and she doesn't preach about it. its just a known fact. also, when she visited ireland, mcaleese presented her with a raw cheese platter. i dont know of many 86 and 92 year olds even alive, let alone ones that are so full of energy.

    Good on her Charles is a credit to a balanced diet.

    Hopwever the Englishy monarchy also apparently believe in
    - talking to plants
    - homoeopathy
    - never marrying Catholics
    - having a monarchy

    Its also news to me that the Queen raised William. I thought Diana did some of that. Don't tell me pasteurised milk was a factor in her death too?

    Fascinating stuff tribesman.

    LostCovey


  • Options
    #106
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    and also, have you yourself had raw milk? or are you just rambling about everyone elses opinions?

    I drank it for years before I learned the risks

    LC


  • Options
    #107
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    As I suspected, you really don't understand the problem. What pastueurisation protects you against is infectious disease. If you catch something from raw milk, you could infect someone else. Also a child could get hold of raw milk that you buy for your own consumption - the law has to protect the innocent victims of your reckless behaviour.

    LC

    you really dont get it. i know what pasteurization does. it also kills everything GOOD in the milk. your acting like this stuff is cyanide or something. by your theory, we may have to ban every single perishable food because "it might" make someone sick.


  • Options
    #108
    jonnyrudyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭jonnyrudyard


    The Hill Billy wrote: »
    To be honest, the previous poster has raised some valid points about the arguments that you put forward. I see no reason to lock the thread because you are unwilling or unable to respond.

    tHB
    Just want to say thanks; I appreciate your objectivity!


    LostCovey, bravo on all counts, but as you can see, you're wasting your time. There is no rational debate or discussion to be had any longer on this thread, if there was any to start with.


  • Options
    #109
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    IR wrote: »
    All bottling would be done onsite
    Of course they would need to use accredited labs for testing
    It would not be feasible to test every batch, but the regularity would have to be based on a thorough risk analysis, I would certainly envision monthly testing.

    At present the most likely producers of raw milk are those already selling raw milk for cheese - they are already subject to extra inspections by the department
    I would foresee that the burden of extra testing would need to be carried by the producer / farmer.

    It is also worth noting though that any new food producer would be subject to extra inspections and would be an extra cost -but I would hope that no-one is saying that we shouldn't encourage any new business as it would cost the government extra to expect!

    No more than the drinking of raw milk, no farmer will be forced to do it, so if they decide to produce raw milk for sale then they can make an informed decision as to whether the extra regulations and paperwork as well as costs associated are viable for them...

    Ah excellent, another layer of interlaced, feather bedded bespoke bureacracy so the gourmands can get it straight from the teat. Some one will be paying for it, and I suspect it won't be you, or anyone else inside the M50.

    LostCovey


  • Options
    #110
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    I drank it for years before I learned the risks

    LC

    so if you got a bad piece of steak once and it gave you food poisoning, you would never eat beef again?


  • Options
    #111
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    you really dont get it. i know what pasteurization does. it also kills everything GOOD in the milk. your acting like this stuff is cyanide or something. by your theory, we may have to ban every single perishable food because "it might" make someone sick.

    Name ONE good thing in milk that pasteurisation kills. Apart from a couple of heat-labile vitamins.

    There are normally no bacteria in from the cow's udder milk unless the cow has mastitis (but if she does the milk is bacterial soup, but might taste OK). Most of the bacteria of concern in milk are actually of faecal origin. So not cyanide, just a dilute solution of bacteria, in a nutrient medium.

    Not talking of banning it, just heat-treating it to make it safer, that's all

    LC


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    so if you got a bad piece of steak once and it gave you food poisoning, you would never eat beef again?

    It didn't give me food poisoning. Look at what I actually said, I LEARNED THE RISK. You don't need haemorrhagic diarrhoea, vomiting and kidney failure to learn that E coli 0157 is best avoided, and every reasonable precaution taken to avoid it (maybe you do). I don't eat pink burgers either, but I love pink steak. Yum yum.

    LC


  • Options
    #113
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    Name ONE good thing in milk that pasteurisation kills. Apart from a couple of heat-labile vitamins.

    There are normally no bacteria in from the cow's udder milk unless the cow has mastitis (but if she does the milk is bacterial soup, but might taste OK). Most of the bacteria of concern in milk are actually of faecal origin. So not cyanide, just a dilute solution of bacteria, in a nutrient medium.

    Not talking of banning it, just heat-treating it to make it safer, that's all

    LC

    well for starts it kills lactase. Lactase digests the milk sugar, lactose, which raises the risk of lactose intolerance when it’s absent. Lactose intolerance is dramatically reduced with long-term consumption of raw milk. im not going to list them all. have a look at this website.

    http://healthyfixx.com/13/pasteurized-milk-killing-the-bad-and-the-good

    and seriously, dont tell me what i can drink. do you think raw milk is more dangerous than fags? if your going to ban raw milk, then they should ban alcohol, fags, fast food, candy, etc....


  • Options
    #114
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    instead of giving people infectious diseases, those foods i will make people obese and give them degenerative diseases. not to mention diabetes, heart disease, cancer, etc.. take a look around. there is an epidemic of sick people. raw milk is the least of your worries.


  • Options
    #115
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    and seriously, dont tell me what i can drink. do you think raw milk is more dangerous than fags? if your going to ban raw milk, then they should ban alcohol, fags, fast food, candy, etc....

    tribesman, you misunderstand a lot about this whole topic.

    For a start I have no intention of telling you what you can drink and neither does the proposed law. Drinking raw milk will still be your prerogative.

    The law only proposes a ban on the commercial sale of the stuff, that's all.

    LC


  • Options
    #116
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    well for starts it kills lactase. Lactase digests the milk sugar, lactose, which raises the risk of lactose intolerance when it’s absent.

    NOT TRUE tribesmn, don't believe me, try the US FDA

    http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/Product-SpecificInformation/MilkSafety/ConsumerInformationAboutMilkSafety/ucm165502.htm

    LC


  • Options
    #117
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    instead of giving people infectious diseases, those foods i will make people obese and give them degenerative diseases.

    This is not caused by food, its caused by eating too much of it


  • Options
    #118
    LostCovey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,717 ✭✭✭LostCovey


    tribesman44 wrote: »
    have a look at this website.

    http://healthyfixx.com/13/pasteurized-milk-killing-the-bad-and-the-good

    I looked. I don't think much of it.

    here's its preventative medicine section:


    Top Plans
    Fighting Wrinkles
    Reversing Type 2 Diabetes Naturally
    Getting the Essential Minerals
    Fixxing your Thyroid
    Heavy Metal Detox
    Fixxing Depression without the Drugs
    Fixxing Acne Naturally
    Fixxing Erectile Dysfunction
    Identifying Sleep Apnea for Free


    I don't have anything that needs to be "fixxed" but I will keep that snake-oil site in mind if that changes anytime soon, y'all.

    LC


  • Options
    #119
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    NOT TRUE tribesmn, don't believe me, try the US FDA

    http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/Product-SpecificInformation/MilkSafety/ConsumerInformationAboutMilkSafety/ucm165502.htm

    LC

    the us fda are a bunch of criminals. same as the people in ireland who want to ban it. i have no trust in these people whatsoever. they use scare tactics to turn the masses off of something. it's so predictable right on down the line and the majority of people eat it right up.


  • Options
    #120
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    This is not caused by food, its caused by eating too much of it

    well most people would be eating more of it than they should. otherwise there wouldn't be a rampant case of obesity in western nations like ireland, america, canada, the uk, etc...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    tribesman44
    Registered Users Posts: 432 ✭✭tribesman44


    LostCovey wrote: »
    I looked. I don't think much of it.

    here's its preventative medicine section:


    Top Plans
    Fighting Wrinkles
    Reversing Type 2 Diabetes Naturally
    Getting the Essential Minerals
    Fixxing your Thyroid
    Heavy Metal Detox
    Fixxing Depression without the Drugs
    Fixxing Acne Naturally
    Fixxing Erectile Dysfunction
    Identifying Sleep Apnea for Free


    I don't have anything that needs to be "fixxed" but I will keep that snake-oil site in mind if that changes anytime soon, y'all.

    LC

    you dont think much of it, yet you take other things you read as gospel. does your sarcasm make you feel smarter? newsflash, people who try to act smart, usually aren't smart. start reading alternative articles and then formulate your own opinion. thats what i do. plus i use my personal experience. and FYI i don't take that website as gospel. you asked for good things pasteurization killed and it listen them. okay, they spelled fix wrong. and you do the same bully tactics mainstream media does. oh they spelled fix wrong so your an idiot if you believe anything on this site, bla bla bla. oh and let me try to be as condescending as possible when i state my opinion. wake up


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement