My farmer was found guilty of contempt of court this week for producing and delivering an illegal "hazardous substance" to me. The substance in question? Elicit drugs? Assault rifles? Anthrax or other deadly agent? No. The hazardous substance they are spending our tax dollars on preventing me from obtaining is raw milk. If my farmer continues to care for and milk my cows for me and give me the milk from my cows, he will be sent to jail. To me this seems like Orwellian joke. Who is the victim in this milk crime? Is this a crime that deserves a jail sentence? On the one hand Big Brother is trying to protect me from my milk, and on the other, Big Brother refuses to tell me which foods in the grocery store are genetically modified. I can buy ground beef, take it home and eat it raw but raw milk, which also comes from cows, is so dangerous it can't be transported across town and given to me. So, what is the science with respect to raw milk? Is the government's position warranted? Independent researcher Nadine Ijaz MSc recently presented "Raw Milk: Myths and Evidence" at the BC Center for Disease Control, examining the recent research on raw milk. Please watch her excellent presentation. What follows is a summary of the points Ms. Ijaz makes in her presentation, and I suggest that you watch the presentation to hear about each of these points in more detail. Myth 1: No evidence that raw milk is more digestible for people with lactose intolerance Myth 2: Enzymes and beneficial bacteria make raw milk more digestible Myth 3: Raw milk is known to prevent osteoporosis, cancer, arthritis, diabetes Myth 4: Raw milk is a high-risk food Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment (QMRA) is the gold standard for determining pathogenic risk. QMRA studies characterize the risk of a particular food as low, moderate or high. Recent QMRA studies for raw milk show that there is a LOW risk for illness / severe health outcome for E-Coli, Listeria, Staphylococcus and Campylobacter. We do not yet have a QMRA for salmonella. To confirm accuracy of QMRAs, outbreak data is used. There has not been a single case of Listeria sickness from raw milk in the last 40 years. There has not been a single death from raw milk since 1998. One to 6% of foodborne illnesses are attributed to all dairy, raw and pasteurized combined. An extremely small percentage of illnesses and hospitalizations from food-borne illnesses are attributed to raw milk. The rate of hospitalization from raw milk was significantly lower than that from all other foods. Green leafy vegetables are the most frequent cause of foodborne illness representing 20 percent of all cases between 1998 and 2010. Yet the government has not named green leafy vegetables a hazardous substance. Myth 5: Raw milk has no unique health benefits The most recent study corroborating this evidence is the Gabriella study on 8000 school-aged children in Europe. Both blood samples and milk samples were taken, and study showed that there is an independent protective effect of raw farm milk on the development of asthma, allergy and hay fever by about half. That is HUGE! There is a suggestion that some of the whey proteins that are sensitive to heat and would be destroyed in pasteurization might be involved. We used to think that each vitamin or mineral works in isolation, and as long as they are in the diet, all will be well. Many studies suggest that there are not large differences in nutrients between pasteurized and raw milk. Now we know that vitamins do not work in isolation - vitamin D works with magnesium and calcium for example. Perhaps it is this synergistic action of the nutrients that might explain why even small nutrient changes can make big differences in how the milk works in our bodies. Vitamin A gets concentrated after pasteurization, whereas vitamins C, B and E are decreased. Perhaps the minor alteration in these ratios have major affects on how they work in our bodies. The recent Pasture Cohort Study of 2012, showed that pregnant mothers that drank raw milk had newborns with improved immunity and decreased cow-milk allergy. Infants drinking raw cow milk before the age of one had better immune gene expression. Risk/benefit analysis seems to pertain specifically to some of the most susceptible groups. Myth 6: Industrial milk processing is harmless to health Some people are choosing raw milk in order to opt of the industrial process. This is the primary reason I personally prefer raw. Due to the precautionary principle it is reasonable to do so. Pasteurization or heat treatment has already been discussed. Homogenization is the process of putting the milk through a fine screen at high pressures to break up the fat globules so the fat won't rise to the top. This is done to improve shelf life primarily. "Homogenization results in the most profound difference to the structure of the milk, and may result in altered health properties" Michalazki Janual 2006: 424. It affects the fat globule membrane and the organization of the proteins. It has been hypothesized that homogenization might be the reason that raw milk is protective for asthma and allergy. Vitamin D3 fortification: A recent 2012 reviewsuggests that vitamin D from the sun is quite different from synthetic vitamin D. There is another study that suggest that kids that are taking vitamin-D fortified milk have lower serum ferritin (iron) status. Individuals may use the precautionary principle and opt out of industrial milk for this reason. Contemporary feeding practices: Consumers are looking for grass-fed milk that have a more beneficial fatty-acid profile with higher omega 3 and CLA content. Current evidence does not support: The current evidence does however, support choice. So what is the role of public health enforcement? We need to focus on minimizing risk to reasonable levels. No other food has a zero hazard tolerance threshold. It is important to realize that pasteurization is no guarantee that the milk will be risk-free. The evidence no longer supports raw milk being designated as a health hazard. Instead governments should consider regulation, mitigation and education in light of the existing evidence. I sincerely hope that Nadine's presentation gets viewed and shared. If you know any health reporters that can take on this story, please let them know. The war on raw milk and on farmers that are trying to feed a community that wants the food they provide, needs to end. Year after year we hear of farmers being prosecuted and forced out of business for providing food to those that want it. Most recently, Wisconsin is threatening to jail farmer Hershberger despite being acquitted of 3 of 4 charges related to his raw-milk coop. We as individuals should have the right to determine what we want to eat, whether that involves raw milk, or avoiding GMO food. We need help making this a national conversation. If you can help, please do! I look forward to your comments on my blog. If you want to share this article, scroll to the very bottom of the blog post and click the "share" icon to post on Facebook, Twitter etc. If you want to subscribe or search for other posts by title or by topic, go to www.wellnesstips.ca.
Related tips Ijaz, Nadine MSc Raw Milk: Myths and Evidence" Presentation to the BC Center for Disease Control, May 2013. Copyright 2013 Nadine Ijaz MSc, Vreni Gurd |
WHY THE FOOD GUIDES ARE WRONG! Learn to eat healthier by finding out how obvious good nutrition really is, and in two hours you will understand what to do. You can implement the changes you need to make at your own pace. No magic pills, no fad diets, no calorie-counting. Just eat properly and as you become healthier the weight will slowly come off. Learn some easy rules that you can apply right away to know whether or not a particular food is healthy to eat. Here are what people are saying that took the course: "Hi, Vreni. I loved the course and would not change it one bit. I found it very easy to follow and I learned a lot!!! I found the price just right. You covered a lot in a short time." Neyleen K. "I was going to email you to tell you how much I enjoyed the course, but you're just too fast for me. You've done a great job of making the information clear yet concise and easy to follow. And I'm so glad you're telling people one size does not fit all. I like that you've included the rules as a separate document." Rebecca V. "Why the Food Guides are Wrong: How to find health and lose weight" is available for the price of $49 USD, after you create an account. You have up to a year from the date purchased to review the course material. |