SB 364 - Allowing raw unpasturized milk for sale

[Mtviewdude]

It would be interesting to see if the anti-gmo people support this.

I ask because mostly because unpasteurized milk has been know to cause illness and death, yet GMO appeared to be banned because it wasn't proven 100% safe.

[steve1]

Gosh! The first thing I thought of was that forced pasteurization of milk is really about keeping all milk production big business or at least big middlemen because how many small farmers have their own pasteurization outfit? So is this really about being safe, or controlling the market? Any pasteurization plants here on BI?

Now I understand that pasteurization kills harmful organisms but it also allows producers to become sloppy- hence supporting agribusiness.

Then I got to thinking what is the biggest biological problem we are facing these days? Antibiotic resistant pathogens that originate on meat products. And the worst culprit of all is probably raw chicken. So what about pasteurizing all raw chicken products? Hundreds and perhaps thousands of people were hospitalized last year for Salmonella infections which probably started with raw chicken. So lets make forced pasteurization of raw chicken a law because agribusiness is already screwing up royally and the problem is certainly a worse public health crisis than raw milk being produced by local small farmers. How many people have gotten sick last year from raw milk verses the thousands that were infected from contaminated chicken?

[robguz]

Everyone was so much healthier in the early 1600s. It was awesome, bacteria hadn't been discovered, so there were no bacterial infections! Let's just go all out and ban pasteurization for some unscientific, conspiracy-theory driven reason. The Big Island should be known for something, might as well be the capital of the anti-science movement.

This bill is a huge step in the wrong direction.

[rainyjim]

Correct me if I'm wrong. BUT, it was my understanding that unsafe handling methods / processing is what represents danger via pathogens produced thereby. Not, the actual raw milk. If milk is produced / processed / distributed / etc in a safe manner then there is no risk?

So, the inherent risk comes from microorganisms due to unsafe handling methods - in brief.

So again, correct me if I'm wrong.

I would think people would be more concerned about the cause of the problem rather than a symtom of it.

If we ban raw milk and give no thought or recognization to the factors that *CAN/MIGHT* make it unsafe then I feel as if we're promoting the unsafe practices which cause the microorganisms existence in the first place.

I don't want anyone to get sick OR die from milk that has been infected by a pathogen. But this getting sick part/dying comes from the pathogen NOT from the raw milk. Also, keep in mind these pathogens can and do sometimes infect pasteurized milk as well as raw milk. So once again, while pasteurizing certainly lowers the risk of infection via pathogens, the infection comes from the pathogen itself which can and does exist in both pasteurized and raw milk.

So, I'm for higher standards of cleanliness and safer processing/distriburing practices for both raw and pasteurized milk.

And I'm for chocolate milk. Yum.

[dayna]

rainyjim, I won't correct you because you are correct. lol

The milk is only as healthy as the animal it comes from, and how it was handled from teat to table.

Dayna

http://www.FarmingAloha.com
www.E-Z-Caps.com

[kalakoa]

quote:

---

The milk is only as healthy as the animal it comes from, and how it was handled from teat to table.

---

...and the big corporations can't seem to manage food "safety" despite money and regulations...

[james weatherford]

This site offers an informed and -- importantly -- contemporary discussion of raw milk:
http://f2cfnd.org/

[Chunkster]

And you might add biased since they tell us on the opening page that they promote raw milk.

[Clayton]

Are you saying that you are not biased?

[rainyjim]

They obviously didn'tt say that. Go away troll.