If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Unpasteurized milk, which many foodies will tell you is the Greatest Health Drink EVAR, is 150 times more likely to kill you than regular milk. But where's the reward without a little risk, amiright?   (yourlife.usatoday.com) divider line 301
    More: Stupid, EVAR, Emerging Infectious Diseases, mental healths, milk, Centers for Disease Control  
•       •       •

3975 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Feb 2012 at 12:29 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



301 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-22 03:04:44 PM

TheWhaleShark: stainedglassdoll: Just out of curiosity, I looked up other foods that are banned in the US. Link (new window)

It seems the majority of reasons for banning foods is due to animal welfare (endangered, cruel, etc).
The next biggest reason seems to be characteristic dangers of the food (sassafras has carcinogens, fugu is poisonous, though I believe fugu is not expressly banned in the US, but requires a license to serve).

It seems only raw milk is banned for contamination reasons, not for any inherent property of the milk itself (aside from its propensity to be contaminated). Just thought that was interesting.
Raw milk isn't banned nationwide. About half the states in the union have laws banning raw milk. The rest regulate its sale to some degree or another.

It should be banned, but I'm very close to giving up on explaining why to people.

I'll try anyhow:

1) Yes, raw milk is more likely to contain deadly pathogens than pasteurized milk.
2) As a result, the sale of raw milk is highly restricted, to prevent dissemination to the population.

Think about it like this. Pasteurized milk causes 100 deaths in a year. Unpasteurized milk causes the same number, but is consumed at 1/150th the rate of pasteurized milk. Thus, if everyone was able to drink raw milk, we'd see 15,000 deaths in a year because of the product.

This is, of course, a purely hypothetical exercise. The actual numbers would vary, but the principle is correct - widespread consumption of raw milk would lead to an increase in the burden placed on the public health system by extremely preventable foodborne illnesses.

And that's the thing - it's a public health issue. So maybe the per capita risk is something like 1/100,000 for raw milk and 1/10,000,000 for pasteurized. Whoop-de-doo, that means nothing to a single consumer. However, iterated out over the entire country, it's a huge difference.

Which leads me to:

3) Your health affects the health of the people around you.

This is increasingly a point which is getting lost on people. When you get sick, you increase the generalized burden on the public health system. You tap finite resources. More people getting sick means the resources are stretched further and further, to the point of breaking. This is why you have to get your farking children vaccinated - I know you can opt out, but you're an absolute mouthbreathing farktard if you do.

But there's an even greater problem. These pathogens are communicable. If you carry around a Salmonella infection, you can spread the organism to places where it wasn't before. The same is true of any bug. You know how smart people open a public bathroom door with a paper towel to avoid getting a cold? It applies to other microbes too, and if you're shedding bacteria, you can get those little buggers everywhere.

So now your decision to drink raw milk (or have your children unvaccinated, let's say) creates a greater chance that you will become a reservoir of disease. Then you'll go around interacting with people, spreading your disease around.

This is how outbreaks start.

And you know what's even worse than all of this? Mycobacterium bovis can contaminate raw milk. That causes bovine tuberculosis. But you know what else it can cause? Human tuberculosis. And in some cases, it can become human-human transmissible after jumping the species barrier. It's also hypothesized that M. tuberculosis just split off from M. bovis. And of course, M. tuberculosis can be found in raw milk.

So no, it's not just your own problem if you drink raw milk. It's my problem too. It's your school's problem. It's your workplace's problem.

And despite the fact that I am objectively correct, raw milk advocates will not change their minds.

It's really not a conspiracy. It's not a government plot. I just don't want people to farking die from diseases that by all rights simply should not be an issue. It's really farking simple. There's no trick to it. I don't get paid enough to matter. There's no shilling here.

It's honestly a bad idea. It's that simple.

/public health microbiologist


Thank you
 
2012-02-22 03:05:37 PM

lokisbong: namegoeshere: Eh. It's legal in my state, sold on the farm only, with posted notice.

I dunno. Having nearly lost babby to foodborne e-coli, watching her scream and writhe in pain, filling diaper after diaper after diaper with bloody shiat, kidney function tests every 12 hours... There's a big part of me who thinks this should be banned. Because just as there are idiot anti-vaxers, there will always be idiot parents who will insist on feeding it to their children. And while you can blood test for alchohol, there is no way to prove that a parent did or didn't feed the kid raw milk.

/did not feed babby undercooked meat or raw milk.
//was careful with food prep before
///is now completely neurotic about it
////not 100% sure where it came from, most likely she touched something touched by someone with it on their hands, and put her hands in her mouth, as kids do.

Sorry about your kid getting so sick! That's gotta be damn scary. I posted a link way upthread about a lady who was paralyzed from drinking raw milk she got at a legal dairy after signing a liability waiver. I wouldn't drink that stuff if it was the only thing to drink in a ten mile radius. They were able to figure out what caused her illness so I say if a kid got sick and they could prove it was from raw milk Jail the idiots who fed the poor kid raw milk for child endangerment and abuse.


Tks. She's 8 now, no lasting effects, so it's all good. I do have an extended family member whom they sometimes visit who drinks the shiat. I have made it known that there will be slow, painful murder if raw milk gets anywhere near a child of mine.
 
2012-02-22 03:07:59 PM

TheWhaleShark: stainedglassdoll: Just out of curiosity, I looked up other foods that are banned in the US. Link (new window)

It seems the majority of reasons for banning foods is due to animal welfare (endangered, cruel, etc).
The next biggest reason seems to be characteristic dangers of the food (sassafras has carcinogens, fugu is poisonous, though I believe fugu is not expressly banned in the US, but requires a license to serve).

It seems only raw milk is banned for contamination reasons, not for any inherent property of the milk itself (aside from its propensity to be contaminated). Just thought that was interesting.
Raw milk isn't banned nationwide. About half the states in the union have laws banning raw milk. The rest regulate its sale to some degree or another.

It should be banned, but I'm very close to giving up on explaining why to people.

I'll try anyhow:

1) Yes, raw milk is more likely to contain deadly pathogens than pasteurized milk.
2) As a result, the sale of raw milk is highly restricted, to prevent dissemination to the population.

Think about it like this. Pasteurized milk causes 100 deaths in a year. Unpasteurized milk causes the same number, but is consumed at 1/150th the rate of pasteurized milk. Thus, if everyone was able to drink raw milk, we'd see 15,000 deaths in a year because of the product.

This is, of course, a purely hypothetical exercise. The actual numbers would vary, but the principle is correct - widespread consumption of raw milk would lead to an increase in the burden placed on the public health system by extremely preventable foodborne illnesses.

And that's the thing - it's a public health issue. So maybe the per capita risk is something like 1/100,000 for raw milk and 1/10,000,000 for pasteurized. Whoop-de-doo, that means nothing to a single consumer. However, iterated out over the entire country, it's a huge difference.

Which leads me to:

3) Your health affects the health of the people around you.

This is increasingly a point whic ...


couldn't you just like, require raw milk producers to keep cow shiat off the f*cking milking apparatus, or something?
we have thousands of activities which some people might consider as nothing more than risk enhancement for accidental death or severe injury, but we allow people partake and say you have now assumed the risk, because life would be f*cking boring if we couldn't go swimming, biking, scuba diving, skiing, hiking, play basketball, or 50,000 thousand other things.
 
2012-02-22 03:08:42 PM

enad58: In Wisconsin the debate has been about farmers being able to drink their own milk that their farm produces. Right now a farmer can't legally go out and grab a cup of milk from their cows and add it to their pancake batter.

It has always been framed as a civil liberty issue to me.


Yes they can, nobody cares. The reason why they are fighting over it is that a farmer tried to be a smart ass and sell shares in his cows/farm. Thus he wasn't selling unpasteurized milk, he was simply giving it away to co-owners.

The state doesn't give a shiat if you drink your own milk/won't come after you. Try to sell it to someone else and they do.
 
2012-02-22 03:11:04 PM
I'm not willing to say the enjoyment one person gets from consuming raw food isn't as valuable as the enjoyment another person gets from skiing into a shrubbery and therefore bar that behavior, not even if I have to foot the emergency bill.
 
2012-02-22 03:11:06 PM

Carth: TheWhaleShark: And, uh, raw milk is definitely regulated in Europe. The whole issue is a topic of much debate in places like France and the UK. What you see much more of in Europe is a proliferation of soft-ripened raw milk cheese.

And they actually have higher incidences of gastrointestinal disease than we do.

It is also worth noting that most of these countries have some kind of widely-available health care and robust public health systems. The public health system in the US is sort of a joke.

The Official EU position (new window) is that raw milk is safe for human consumption and additional regulations are not required but allowed by individual countries.

When I was in France and Spain raw milk (and cheese) were readily available at just about any grocery store. If raw milk posed as great a risk as you're saying wouldn't countries with public health care systems be more likely to ban it? Why would they want to continue to sell things that place such a burden on the state run system.


Let me ask you this.

Does Europe have the same mega chains that Americans largely get their food from?

Do they have a system that rewards cutting corners and doles out minor punishments for health code violations/transgressions?

Do they have a tradition of buying a month's worth of food in one go?

Do they eat a large amount of cold cereal with milk?

Do European families pasteurize or otherwise cook that raw milk before serving it?

There are huge demographic differences between American and European consumers that render any comparison difficult at best.
 
2012-02-22 03:12:54 PM

Carth: ericroane: FYI....cow milk is for calfs

and honey is bee vomit. What's your point?


Honey is not bee vomit. It's nectar from plants, that the bees collect and concentrate via evaporation.
 
2012-02-22 03:15:23 PM

relcec: couldn't you just like, require raw milk producers to keep cow shiat off the f*cking milking apparatus, or something?


In California where I used to live they had very strict regulations on keeping everything clean while milking and a lady still ended up Paralyzed from bad raw milk. So It seems just keeping things clean isn't enough to make sure its safe? I say ban the shiat but the nutjobs will freak out about taking away their freedoms.
 
2012-02-22 03:18:11 PM

jagec: stainedglassdoll:
Come on, man. I know, Welcome to Fark, and all that, but there's no need to disrespect the guy's profession. If microbiology is not a "real science", I wonder what your qualifications for defining "real science" are. I actually enjoy when people who have professional experience with the topic at hand join the thread and offer some real hands-on perspective on the subject matter. You don't have to agree with it, but at least it's a change from a bunch of us layman speculating about things.


Well, fair enough, maybe I was a little too trollish there. But to answer your question, I will post this comic, and note that within biology, any sort of "public ___" focus tends to be considered "softer" by those of us who do straight research. Maybe we're just jealous that they actually help people.

[math.sfsu.edu image 640x266]

But seriously, if you're going to ban milk, you might as well start making handwashing laws and mandating exercise.


Um, we do have handwashing laws. We have an incredible number of laws regulating food producers in the US, especially when it comes to restaurant cleanliness and employee handling practices. You know those signs that are all "Employees must wash hands" and such? Yeah, those are laws.

I mean, no, we can't make laws about handwashing in your homes or at work. But, I mean...you should really be washing your hands thoroughly. That's something that we try to communicate as hard as possible, and it still doesn't work.

I'm all about mandatory exercise in public schools. Gym class should be required, and the students should have to be physically active. There are lots of studies showing that physical activity actually improves academic performance. And while I can't really think of a way to get adults to do it, it's possible that encouraging that level of physical activity in kids will translate to better habits as adults.

So, we regulate what we reasonably can (farm level production) and otherwise engage in widespread informational campaigns to try to improve public health and reduce the burden of disease.

For what it's worth, by the way, almost all biologists (and many many chemists) are engaged in some manner of public health research. "Public Health" is a very applied field, this is true. But it's something that everyone really cares about, whether they know it or not.
 
2012-02-22 03:19:09 PM

TheWhaleShark: jagec: TheWhaleShark:
/public health microbiologist

I gues

stainedglassdoll: TheWhaleShark:

...
.



too long to quote apparently - but did you just advocate Irradiating all our food as a safety precaution???

if i read that incorrectly - my apologies.

if i read that correctly - i await your apology for suggesting something that freaking stupid. and go ahead and make that a 'double apology' for being an educated person suggesting something so dumb.
 
2012-02-22 03:19:42 PM
I've only had whole milk in cheeses, but they certainly seemed to be tastier to me. Amongst all of the CDC reasons in their FAQ for not drinking it, they didn't once touch on taste differences. Since it sounds like most bacteria don't survive a 60 day aging process in a saline environment, I'd say that's on the safer side of things.



Kazan: Numerous studies have found that conjugated linoleic acid, found mainly in milk, meat and dairy products, provides several health benefits including prevention of atherosclerosis, different types of cancer, and hypertension and improved immune function.[64][65][65]

There is recent evidence suggesting consumption of milk is effective at promoting muscle growth[66] and improving post exercise muscle recovery.[67]

In 2010, scientists at the Harvard School of Public Health identified a substance in dairy fat, trans-palmitoleic acid, that may substantially reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes. The researchers examined participants who have been followed for 20 years in an observational study to evaluate risk factors for cardiovascular diseases in older adults. During followup it was found that individuals with higher circulating levels of trans-palmitoleic acid had a much lower risk of developing diabetes, with about a 60% lower risk among participants in the highest quintile (fifth) of trans-palmitoleic acid levels.[68]
Link (new window)


Brought to you by www.morrisvetcenter.com


The Angry Hand of God: I f*cking love milk. That is all.


Me too. More importantly, milk never tastes better than when it is stored in a glass vessel just slightly above freezing.

Evil Mackerel: Good thing that was shishimi sashimi.


FTFY. If you're gonna correct someone, don't Rotsky it.
 
2012-02-22 03:19:43 PM

lokisbong: relcec: couldn't you just like, require raw milk producers to keep cow shiat off the f*cking milking apparatus, or something?

In California where I used to live they had very strict regulations on keeping everything clean while milking and a lady still ended up Paralyzed from bad raw milk. So It seems just keeping things clean isn't enough to make sure its safe? I say ban the shiat but the nutjobs will freak out about taking away their freedoms.


The actual cow frequently harbors the disease (i.e. TB), though one should be able to tell if a cow is sick/not milk a sick cow. Still mistakes happen, which is why pasteurization is nice.
 
2012-02-22 03:22:00 PM

meat0918: Surprisingly, humans are excellent multi-taskers and can focus on several different things during the course of their days.


What does that have to do with anything? He wrote up a huge post making raw milk consumption sound like it could become some huge public health concern. The odds on that are long. Therefore, there's no sound reason to invest our limited resources as a society in worrying about it.

You're not going to get the plague from some idiot who drank raw milk. Don't worry about it. Just laugh at them when they get sick. Or, alternately, beat them and steal their wallet as compensation for the increase in your health insurance premium. Whichever.

inner ted: also: i saw that someone once died just crossing the street. better stay indoors.

/also heard that someone died IN THEIR OWN HOME!!!!111!!!!!
//where does it end?


So your argument here is, basically, that jumping off a balcony into a swimming pool is roughly as dangerous as crossing the street? Or is that drinking raw milk is roughly as safe as crossing the street? I can't tell which retarded way you're going with this because you chose to be a sarcastic, waffling douche while being incredibly wrong instead of just being clearly incredibly wrong.

Please clarify in what way you've chosen to be absolutely ridiculous. I'd hate to mock you for the wrong thing.
 
2012-02-22 03:22:17 PM

lokisbong: relcec: couldn't you just like, require raw milk producers to keep cow shiat off the f*cking milking apparatus, or something?

In California where I used to live they had very strict regulations on keeping everything clean while milking and a lady still ended up Paralyzed from bad raw milk. So It seems just keeping things clean isn't enough to make sure its safe? I say ban the shiat but the nutjobs will freak out about taking away their freedoms.


and we have very strict regulations that say customer accounts need to be segregated, but MF global still apparently used close to a billion in customer funds for their own devices.
so we should ban brokerage houses? or maybe try to do some regulation beyond rule promulgation?
and like I said, who am I to say that being a raw food devotee isn't just as valuable to its adherents as the participants of downhill skiing? we didn't ban that after sonny bono died flying face first into a tree, and that's not a rare event either.
 
2012-02-22 03:24:30 PM

Tawnos: Rent Party: Tawnos: Rent Party: Nurglitch: PsyLord:

Um, yeah, you know that the sushi, at least, is specially frozen to remove pathogens, right?

What did they do before the advent of refrigeration?

I chill sushi because it is easier to cut when it's cold.

They didn't eat salmon, for one.

Well, perhaps not in the far east, but here in the Northwest, salmon was such an integral part of the native diet they turned the farking thing into a God.

[www.mensaww.org image 325x325]

Raw salmon?

And yeah, I know about Salmon Days, since I live right up the hill ;)


Uh, yeah. Raw sashimi grade salmon is available at a sushi place near you right now.
 
2012-02-22 03:25:57 PM
Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.
 
2012-02-22 03:27:33 PM
Very odd. This site is usually keyed-up to scream bloody murder at the mention of prohibition. "NANNY STATE!!! SNOWFLAKE!!!". But here, with what has to be the least important food-related danger of all time, it gets quite a bit of support.

/I once gave a man a glass of raw milk, just to watch him DIE!!!
 
2012-02-22 03:27:52 PM

Splinshints: meat0918: Surprisingly, humans are excellent multi-taskers and can focus on several different things during the course of their days.

What does that have to do with anything? He wrote up a huge post making raw milk consumption sound like it could become some huge public health concern. The odds on that are long. Therefore, there's no sound reason to invest our limited resources as a society in worrying about it.

You're not going to get the plague from some idiot who drank raw milk. Don't worry about it. Just laugh at them when they get sick. Or, alternately, beat them and steal their wallet as compensation for the increase in your health insurance premium. Whichever.

inner ted: also: i saw that someone once died just crossing the street. better stay indoors.

/also heard that someone died IN THEIR OWN HOME!!!!111!!!!!
//where does it end?

So your argument here is, basically, that jumping off a balcony into a swimming pool is roughly as dangerous as crossing the street? Or is that drinking raw milk is roughly as safe as crossing the street? I can't tell which retarded way you're going with this because you chose to be a sarcastic, waffling douche while being incredibly wrong instead of just being clearly incredibly wrong.

Please clarify in what way you've chosen to be absolutely ridiculous. I'd hate to mock you for the wrong thing.


just offering up the same trite garbage example as you sir. if you are so put off at that, then you may want to examine your existence.

or is it that you cry if someone "out douches" you? if that is all you are clinging to in life, being Farks biggest douche, then i refer you to again to examine your existence.
 
2012-02-22 03:29:07 PM

inner ted: TheWhaleShark: jagec: TheWhaleShark:
/public health microbiologist

I gues

stainedglassdoll: TheWhaleShark:

...
.


too long to quote apparently - but did you just advocate Irradiating all our food as a safety precaution???

if i read that incorrectly - my apologies.

if i read that correctly - i await your apology for suggesting something that freaking stupid. and go ahead and make that a 'double apology' for being an educated person suggesting something so dumb.


Well this is how I know you're a moron.
 
2012-02-22 03:29:40 PM

inner ted: if i read that correctly - i await your apology for suggesting something that freaking stupid. and go ahead and make that a 'double apology' for being an educated person suggesting something so dumb.


lokisbong: Just read all this. From the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.

/Damnit I am on a roll today getting my posts wrong.
 
2012-02-22 03:30:25 PM

inner ted: just offering up the same trite garbage example as you sir. if you are so put off at that, then you may want to examine your existence.

or is it that you cry if someone "out douches" you? if that is all you are clinging to in life, being Farks biggest douche, then i refer you to again to examine your existence.


In other words, you suddenly realized what you posted was incredibly stupid and now you're just flailing.

Bye bye now.
 
2012-02-22 03:31:54 PM

lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.


that is precious.

so as long as the correct safety measures are followed, the product should be safe???

are there 'irony' tags for posts?
 
2012-02-22 03:35:19 PM
www.siegler.net

Raw milk makes the best cheese
 
2012-02-22 03:35:22 PM

inner ted: TheWhaleShark: jagec: TheWhaleShark:
/public health microbiologist

I gues

stainedglassdoll: TheWhaleShark:

...
.


too long to quote apparently - but did you just advocate Irradiating all our food as a safety precaution???

if i read that incorrectly - my apologies.

if i read that correctly - i await your apology for suggesting something that freaking stupid. and go ahead and make that a 'double apology' for being an educated person suggesting something so dumb.


Yes, I am advocating food irradiation as a food safety precaution. I've studied the technology extensively. I've been to several international conferences about food safety technology, where I've read research from experts on the subject as well as attended lectures from those experts. I've had the chance to question them, too.

Food irradiation is harmless, and the benefits it provides are staggering. There is literally no reason not to do it. No, it does not make your food radioactive.

couldn't you just like, require raw milk producers to keep cow shiat off the f*cking milking apparatus, or something?


Actually, we do. The problem is that the nature of commodity makes it more prone to contamination anyhow.

Unless you actually decontaminate the cow and milk them in a cleanroom, you'll get environmental cross-contamination. It's a farm. There's shiat everywhere. Literally. The fecal-food contamination route is well-understood in the restaurant industry - it exists in all food production chains.

This is actually a really fascinating field of study when you get into it. Food production is amazingly complex and intricate. It's a farking crime that farmers in this country aren't earning a living wage - those guys are trying to do more for your health than you probably realize.
 
2012-02-22 03:37:25 PM

RexTalionis: Carth: RexTalionis: Carth: Raw milk is legal and unregulated throughout much of Europe. Why don't they see the level of deaths and disease transmission you're describing?

Hasn't there been documented outbreaks of diseases with high mortality like listeriosis that were often linked with consumption of raw milk and raw milk products in Europe?

60 fatalities (and 400 illnesses) in a year for a population of approximately 730 million is very small. When you consider 30,000 people in the US (with a population of 310million) die from the flu and on the highways each year it doesn't seem like that big a risk.

Not everybody in Europe drink raw milk or eat raw milk products, so using the "population of 730 million" is awfully disingenuous.


Sorry, I didn't mean to imply everyone in Europe drank raw milk. I was interested in the rate of illness for areas that have raw milk readily available to see whether it posed a public safety hazard in places it is sold. I don't think anyone is arguing that drinking raw milk is an individual risk and the rate of illness is higher among those who do it but we let people engage in all kinds of risky behavior from drinking, smoking, skydiving and unprotected sex without making it illegal. Why draw the line at raw milk?
 
2012-02-22 03:38:11 PM

inner ted: lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.

that is precious.

so as long as the correct safety measures are followed, the product should be safe???

are there 'irony' tags for posts?


Yeah that really answered my question. Stop being a douchebag and answer the question. This is taken directly from the CDC page I linked.
"Medical sterilization facilities have been operated in this country for more than 30 years, without a fatal accident. Over 100 such facilities are currently licensed, along with at least that many medical radiation treatment centers, and bone marrow transplant centers (which also use Cobalt 60 to irradiate patients). No events have been documented in this country that led to exposure of the population at large to radioactivity. In other countries, a small number of fatal incidents have been documented in which a worker by-passed multiple safety steps to enter the chamber while the source was exposed, resulting in a severe or even lethal radiation injury to themselves. "
The food system is essentially the same as the medical system so where is the problem?
 
2012-02-22 03:38:16 PM

inner ted: lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.

that is precious.

so as long as the correct safety measures are followed, the product should be safe???

are there 'irony' tags for posts?


Do you have [legit] info that irradiation is not safe? Because if so, I would be very interested in reading about it.
 
2012-02-22 03:38:45 PM

CheekyMonkey: Carth: ericroane: FYI....cow milk is for calfs

and honey is bee vomit. What's your point?

Honey is not bee vomit. It's nectar from plants, that the bees collect and concentrate via evaporation.


Are you saying the Straight dope (new window) lied to me!?
 
2012-02-22 03:38:50 PM

Splinshints: inner ted: just offering up the same trite garbage example as you sir. if you are so put off at that, then you may want to examine your existence.

or is it that you cry if someone "out douches" you? if that is all you are clinging to in life, being Farks biggest douche, then i refer you to again to examine your existence.

In other words, you suddenly realized what you posted was incredibly stupid and now you're just flailing.

Bye bye now.


wow

your reading comprehension is on par with your logic.

but please keep giving me more ammo. it's kinda fun. but also a little sad.

just to make sure, you aren't like really retarded are you?? i just don't want to make fun of the handicapped.
 
2012-02-22 03:39:21 PM

lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.


I'm all for food irradiation and all the cool superpowers I can get from it. Wha, I can't get any powers? Bummer...
 
2012-02-22 03:39:32 PM

Rent Party: Tawnos: Rent Party: Tawnos: Rent Party: Nurglitch: PsyLord:

Um, yeah, you know that the sushi, at least, is specially frozen to remove pathogens, right?

What did they do before the advent of refrigeration?

I chill sushi because it is easier to cut when it's cold.

They didn't eat salmon, for one.

Well, perhaps not in the far east, but here in the Northwest, salmon was such an integral part of the native diet they turned the farking thing into a God.

[www.mensaww.org image 325x325]

Raw salmon?

And yeah, I know about Salmon Days, since I live right up the hill ;)

Uh, yeah. Raw sashimi grade salmon is available at a sushi place near you right now.


Do try to keep up. You asked what was done before refrigeration existed to kill or significantly inhibit pathogens (parasites, actually - the animal's immune system takes care of pathogens inside muscle tissue) from sushi. I said that they didn't eat salmon, in reference to the question at hand - sushi.

You then mentioned the local tribes and their worship of salmon and that they ate it. I asked if they ate it raw, again, in reference to the running thread of eating fish prior to refrigeration.

Then, for reasons I don't understand, you made this final non sequitur about sashimi being available nowadays, nearby.
 
2012-02-22 03:40:24 PM

namegoeshere: inner ted: lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.

that is precious.

so as long as the correct safety measures are followed, the product should be safe???

are there 'irony' tags for posts?

Do you have [legit] info that irradiation is not safe? Because if so, I would be very interested in reading about it.


Radiation is scary, therefore food irradiation is dangerous.
 
2012-02-22 03:42:45 PM
Also, RE: raw milk cheeses and the 60-day aging process:

The 60-day requirement was an arbitrary thing set by the FDA a long time ago. At the time, there had been no reported illnesses from raw milk cheeses aged at least that long, so they figured "what the hell" and set the limit there. This is how science often works.

As we developed better investigative technologies, we've actually started finding organisms that survive the 60-day aging process. Which, by the way, is really freaking cool from a microbiological standpoint. Some of these bugs can persist for years in amazingly inhospitable environments.

The Malt-O-Meal company had a Salmonella contamination problem back in 1994 or so. They did a cleanup and continued production. In 2008, an outbreak of salmonellosis was traced to Malt-O-Meal, and it turns out that the strain in 2008 was the exact same strain that caused the 1994 outbreak. They scoured their entire facility until they discovered a reservoir of the bug hidden inside a concrete wall. It had seeped in through a crack and stayed there for 14 years.

Bacteria are amazing.

Anyhow, there have been recent outbreaks associated with raw milk cheeses aged 60+ days. We don't have a lot of information on this right now, though, since we haven't actually been looking at these cheeses for a long time. So all we know is that it's possible to contract a severe foodborne illness through aged raw milk cheese. Previously, we thought it didn't happen.
 
2012-02-22 03:46:23 PM

TheWhaleShark:
Um, we do have handwashing laws. We have an incredible number of laws regulating food producers in the US, especially when it comes to restaurant cleanliness and employee handling practices. You know those signs that are all "Employees must wash hands" and such? Yeah, those are laws.

I mean, no, we can't make laws about handwashing in your homes or at work. But, I mean...you should really be washing your hands thoroughly. That's something that we try to communicate as hard as possible, and it still doesn't work.

I'm all about mandatory exercise in public schools. Gym class should be required, and the students should have to be physically active. There are lots of studies showing that physical activity actually improves academic performance. And while I can't really think of a way to get adults to do it, it's possible that encouraging that level of physical activity in kids will translate to better habits as adults.

So, we regulate what we reasonably can (farm level production) and otherwise engage in widespread informational campaigns to try to improve public health and reduce the burden of disease.

For what it's worth, by the way, almost all biologists (and many many chemists) are engaged in some manner of public health research. "Public Health" is a very applied field, this is true. But it's something that everyone really cares about, whether they know it or not.


Hey now, I already apologized for my dickish comment, now you're just rubbing it in. :-p

But I still think that there is a difference between the requirements for children (who don't have as many rights or as good judgement), food service employees (whose work will affect many people beyond themselves, and which often occurs behind the scenes where customers can't decide whether their sanitation standards are adequate), and regular ol' you and I (who should have a certain amount of leeway over the risks that we take).

OK, that was a horrible sentence, but try this. My current PI's wife is at the FDA. Apparently she doesn't let their family have a stuffed turkey at Thanksgiving. Stuffing gets baked separately in their house, due to food safety concerns. Now, these are real concerns, and incorrectly stuffing a turkey DOES carry some reasonably substantial risks...but regulating the practice would be absolutely ludicrous as a public safety measure. Informing the public about the risks and how to mitigate them is the rational response, even if many people won't listen.
 
2012-02-22 03:51:06 PM
I know of a gentleman that would sample the raw milk arriving at a cheese plant because "that's the way he always did it on the farm growing up". I also know that this gentleman contracted a horrible infection in his mouth.

While possibly unrelated - I tend to think otherwise.

/Pasteurization makes milk safer - period.
 
2012-02-22 03:52:00 PM

jagec: OK, that was a horrible sentence, but try this. My current PI's wife is at the FDA. Apparently she doesn't let their family have a stuffed turkey at Thanksgiving. Stuffing gets baked separately in their house, due to food safety concerns. Now, these are real concerns, and incorrectly stuffing a turkey DOES carry some reasonably substantial risks...but regulating the practice would be absolutely ludicrous as a public safety measure. Informing the public about the risks and how to mitigate them is the rational response, even if many people won't listen.


Here's the question. The behavior that we want to regulate is the selling of raw milk by milk producers.

Does the regulation of that behavior seem more like:
1) A regulation that people preparing and selling food should wash their hands?
or
2) A regulation that dictates how people cook their turkeys?
 
2012-02-22 03:53:01 PM
What do all those stupid scientists know? What have they ever done for anybody?
 
2012-02-22 03:56:05 PM

lokisbong: inner ted: lokisbong: Just read all this. from the CDC (new window) What's your problem with Food Irradiation? The CDC seems to think as long as the techs doing it don't bypass safety measures it is safe.

that is precious.

so as long as the correct safety measures are followed, the product should be safe???

are there 'irony' tags for posts?

Yeah that really answered my question. Stop being a douchebag and answer the question. This is taken directly from the CDC page I linked.
"Medical sterilization facilities have been operated in this country for more than 30 years, without a fatal accident. Over 100 such facilities are currently licensed, along with at least that many medical radiation treatment centers, and bone marrow transplant centers (which also use Cobalt 60 to irradiate patients). No events have been documented in this country that led to exposure of the population at large to radioactivity. In other countries, a small number of fatal incidents have been documented in which a worker by-passed multiple safety steps to enter the chamber while the source was exposed, resulting in a severe or even lethal radiation injury to themselves. "
The food system is essentially the same as the medical system so where is the problem?


exactly: where is the problem??? if farmers adhere to strict protocols of safety (just like these nice folks irradiating things) then why can't their product be "safe" as well??

there will always be those who cut corners and cheat. you just seem to think that this only applies to raw milk farms. i don't share that notion.
 
2012-02-22 03:58:11 PM

jagec: TheWhaleShark:
Um, we do have handwashing laws. We have an incredible number of laws regulating food producers in the US, especially when it comes to restaurant cleanliness and employee handling practices. You know those signs that are all "Employees must wash hands" and such? Yeah, those are laws.

I mean, no, we can't make laws about handwashing in your homes or at work. But, I mean...you should really be washing your hands thoroughly. That's something that we try to communicate as hard as possible, and it still doesn't work.

I'm all about mandatory exercise in public schools. Gym class should be required, and the students should have to be physically active. There are lots of studies showing that physical activity actually improves academic performance. And while I can't really think of a way to get adults to do it, it's possible that encouraging that level of physical activity in kids will translate to better habits as adults.

So, we regulate what we reasonably can (farm level production) and otherwise engage in widespread informational campaigns to try to improve public health and reduce the burden of disease.

For what it's worth, by the way, almost all biologists (and many many chemists) are engaged in some manner of public health research. "Public Health" is a very applied field, this is true. But it's something that everyone really cares about, whether they know it or not.

Hey now, I already apologized for my dickish comment, now you're just rubbing it in. :-p

But I still think that there is a difference between the requirements for children (who don't have as many rights or as good judgement), food service employees (whose work will affect many people beyond themselves, and which often occurs behind the scenes where customers can't decide whether their sanitation standards are adequate), and regular ol' you and I (who should have a certain amount of leeway over the risks that we take).

OK, that was a horrible sentence, but try this. My current PI's ...


You did apologize, and I caught that. I was just writing a wall of text while you posted yours, so I didn't get to see it. You know how those walls of text go. :P

My actual primary problem with raw milk is the demographic of consumption. In many many cases, we see parents buying raw milk and feeding it to their children, who have no control over their own diet. The parents erroneously believe that the raw milk is healthier, and wind up subjecting their children to a wildly preventable chance of dying. I'm talking 5 year old kids dying or being permanently paralyzed. Fetuses being aborted. Stuff like that.

The decision there also poses an unreasonable danger to other children.

I mean, honestly, if an adult wants to OD on heroin, whatever. But subjecting a child or another person to an unreasonable risk of contracting a foodborne illness that carries a not-insignificant chance of dying is just, well, unacceptable.

We do also try very hard to control this by disseminating information and educating the public. It's not working. Flatly. Raw milk consumption is rising, and the burden of foodborne illness has shifted with it. We've actually virtually eliminated the majority of problems in meat - now we're looking at fresh produce and dairy as the biggest vectors.

It's an ever-changing field of study, too. The organisms we're dealing with are evolving as we're trying to figure out how to fight them. So the problematic foods change every few years, and we wind up chasing after them, trying to prevent people from dying.

I agree that some government regulations are stupid. The raw milk thing? That's really not a stupid regulation.
 
2012-02-22 03:59:31 PM

Carth: CheekyMonkey: Carth: ericroane: FYI....cow milk is for calfs

and honey is bee vomit. What's your point?

Honey is not bee vomit. It's nectar from plants, that the bees collect and concentrate via evaporation.

Are you saying the Straight dope (new window) lied to me!?


If one is going by the standard definition of 'vomit', which is a mixture of partially-digested food (and/or beer) and digestive juices, then yes, they lied to you. Read your link - bees have a separate internal receptacle for carrying nectar back to the hive. It is not stored in their stomachs (i.e. organ used for digesting food).
 
2012-02-22 04:02:34 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Very odd. This site is usually keyed-up to scream bloody murder at the mention of prohibition. "NANNY STATE!!! SNOWFLAKE!!!". But here, with what has to be the least important food-related danger of all time, it gets quite a bit of support.

/I once gave a man a glass of raw milk, just to watch him DIE!!!


See TheWhaleShark's posts. It isn't just a threat to you, but to others.
 
2012-02-22 04:05:04 PM

inner ted: exactly: where is the problem??? if farmers adhere to strict protocols of safety (just like these nice folks irradiating things) then why can't their product be "safe" as well??

there will always be those who cut corners and cheat. you just seem to think that this only applies to raw milk farms. i don't share that notion.


Irradiated food is not radioactive! So what's the danger? The only danger is to the people working in the plant if they side step safety protocols which would be like drinking raw milk...Stupid to the extreme. Raw milk can have every safety step taken and still be dangerous so I still don't see where you are coming from.
 
2012-02-22 04:11:03 PM
Also, if you're interested in raw milk taste without the risk, you should look into high pressure processing:

HPP

From what I understand, the technology is expensive to implement on the small farm level.
 
2012-02-22 04:18:31 PM
well i think HWBR seeds are the best Greatest Health Drink EVAR
 
2012-02-22 04:19:48 PM
As much as I hate to offend the sensibilities of some here (well, not really) I must point out that certain food regulations were put into place for damn good reasons.

Mainly, to not catch any diseases which had been killing off folks for generations.

That's also why we don't fertilize crops with cheap, readily available, human sewage. In most cases, treated human sewage -- melorganite (SP) -- is not allowed either. There are versions which are considered safe, but after the treatments, they aint so cheap.

Until fairly recently, you COULD safely eat raw meat, except pork, because the global demand had not pushed slaughter houses into over drive. (Though, it wasn't unusual for such places to sweep up the leavings from the floors and sell them -- dirt and all -- to companies for potted meat products. In the early 1900's.) Nor had American meat become so obnoxiously expensive that we had to import a large percentage from other nations with less concern over safety.

Until sometime in the 70's, cows milk was nearly considered a miracle food, especially after the FDA agreed to the addition of various supplements, like Vit D. When everyone went insane over cholesterol, that changed. Eventually healthy milk, whole or skimmed, was removed from the food pyramid and replaced with bottled water. Beef was replaced with fish.

Until the FDA came along, farmers would plant on contaminated land and sell the produce. Especially in areas around lead mines and those polluted with Mercury, which once was heavily used as a debarking agent in lumbering.

The Citrus tree is the ONLY plant that I know of which naturally filters contaminated water through it's roots, enabling growers to tap into major drainage ditches for irrigation.

Many food laws were enacted to keep us from killing ourselves. 'Organic or Natural' is NOT always healthy.

Plus, the booming global population means even greater chances of infecting the food supply unintentionally. More folks means more waste and more disease and increasingly less good farm land.
 
2012-02-22 04:20:39 PM

TheWhaleShark: Think about it like this. Pasteurized milk causes 100 deaths in a year. Unpasteurized milk causes the same number, but is consumed at 1/150th the rate of pasteurized milk. Thus, if everyone was able to drink raw milk, we'd see 15,000 deaths in a year because of the product.


From the CDC:

From 1998 through 2009, 93 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,837 illnesses, 195 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. source (new window)

How to reconcile your claim with the above cited claim?
 
2012-02-22 04:22:43 PM

CheekyMonkey: Carth: CheekyMonkey: Carth: ericroane: FYI....cow milk is for calfs

and honey is bee vomit. What's your point?

Honey is not bee vomit. It's nectar from plants, that the bees collect and concentrate via evaporation.

Are you saying the Straight dope (new window) lied to me!?

If one is going by the standard definition of 'vomit', which is a mixture of partially-digested food (and/or beer) and digestive juices, then yes, they lied to you. Read your link - bees have a separate internal receptacle for carrying nectar back to the hive. It is not stored in their stomachs (i.e. organ used for digesting food).


I stand corrected next time I'll say "honey is just regurgitated undigested nectar covered in enzymes that comes out of a bees mouth after being in its honey stomach"
 
2012-02-22 04:26:25 PM

Wolfy: TheWhaleShark: Think about it like this. Pasteurized milk causes 100 deaths in a year. Unpasteurized milk causes the same number, but is consumed at 1/150th the rate of pasteurized milk. Thus, if everyone was able to drink raw milk, we'd see 15,000 deaths in a year because of the product.

From the CDC:

From 1998 through 2009, 93 outbreaks due to consumption of raw milk or raw milk products were reported to CDC. These resulted in 1,837 illnesses, 195 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths. source (new window)

How to reconcile your claim with the above cited claim?


1) He was using round numbers to demonstrate a theoretical point.
2) Your reading comprehension is abysmal.
 
2012-02-22 04:30:47 PM

lokisbong: inner ted: exactly: where is the problem??? if farmers adhere to strict protocols of safety (just like these nice folks irradiating things) then why can't their product be "safe" as well??

there will always be those who cut corners and cheat. you just seem to think that this only applies to raw milk farms. i don't share that notion.

Irradiated food is not radioactive! So what's the danger? The only danger is to the people working in the plant if they side step safety protocols which would be like drinking raw milk...Stupid to the extreme. Raw milk can have every safety step taken and still be dangerous so I still don't see where you are coming from.


There is evidence that the irradiation process can impact the food. Vitamins A + C seems to be easily degraded. There was the case of cats in Australia getting a demyelination disease from eating a diet that included cat food that had been extensively irradiated. While this was likely due to their diet lacking in certain nutrients/vitamins that were destroyed in the irradiation process, nobody has ruled out that the process didn't cause a transformation of a protein/molecule that caused the disease either (though this seems very unlikely). Incidentally the cats recovery from the demyelination was pretty remarkable:

Link (new window)
 
2012-02-22 04:39:58 PM

Tawnos: Rent Party: Tawnos: Rent Party: Tawnos: Rent Party: Nurglitch: PsyLord:

Um, yeah, you know that the sushi, at least, is specially frozen to remove pathogens, right?

What did they do before the advent of refrigeration?

I chill sushi because it is easier to cut when it's cold.

They didn't eat salmon, for one.

Well, perhaps not in the far east, but here in the Northwest, salmon was such an integral part of the native diet they turned the farking thing into a God.

[www.mensaww.org image 325x325]

Raw salmon?

And yeah, I know about Salmon Days, since I live right up the hill ;)

Uh, yeah. Raw sashimi grade salmon is available at a sushi place near you right now.

Do try to keep up. You asked what was done before refrigeration existed to kill or significantly inhibit pathogens (parasites, actually - the animal's immune system takes care of pathogens inside muscle tissue) from sushi. I said that they didn't eat salmon, in reference to the question at hand - sushi.

You then mentioned the local tribes and their worship of salmon and that they ate it. I asked if they ate it raw, again, in reference to the running thread of eating fish prior to refrigeration.


Well, yeah they did eat it raw. And dried, and smoked, and cured. They ate all kinds of disgusting shiat. Lewis and Clark went to great lengths to describe them eating an elk they had felled. They gutted it, and ate the intestines right out of the animal, all zombie like. Are you suggesting that no one ate fish before refrigeration? Because that's what it sounds like, and that's dumb as all hell.

So, what is your point?
 
Displayed 50 of 301 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report