Pasteurization extends shelf life, enables milk to be shipped great distances, and cleans up after less-than-ideal practices in feeding and sanitation — CTV B.C.

Darcy Wintonyk continues with her excellent CTV B.C. series on raw milk and how it compares to pasteurized milk. Here’s an excerpt from her latest post:

That's like a backwards way of saying raw milk is worth the risk -- if the risks don't outweigh the benefits. Now that's something we can all agree on! Rapprochement at last! Photo and quote above, from CTVBC.

“In the late 1800s, primitive sanitation, refrigeration and rampant tuberculosis contributed to the deaths of thousands – if not millions – of milk drinkers. Louis Pasteur’s revolutionary technique of treating milk with heat to kill bacteria, known as pasteurization, almost eliminated those fatalities.

But raw milk producers say pasteurization is no longer necessary in an age where raw dairy can be produced safely — and that heat treating milk can actually be more harmful than helpful.

David Gumpert, author of The Raw Milk Revolution, says that as the dairy industry grew and safety standards improved pasteurization became more about preservation and less about consumer protection.

“As much as it improves the safety is allows producers to ship the milk great distances,” he said.

As consumers moved farther away from their food supply it became necessary to preserve the milk for a longer time. This process is accelerated with ultra-pasteurization, the super heating of milk to kill bacteria.

“This milk can keep for months,” said Gumpert. “The producers like that. It’s less perishable.”

But raw milk experts say the end result is a product that isn’t as nutritious as most people believe, or would want to know.

“The irony is a lot of consumers are now buying organic milk because they think it’s healthier because the cows are being fed organic grain. But because there aren’t as many of those farms it has to be shipped farther and it has to be ultra pasteurized,” Gumpert said.

The milk might have a longer shelf life, but raw dairy producers say once the bacteria are killed through heat treatment so are many of the health benefits.

“These modern dead milk products now cause allergies and lactose intolerance to huge sectors of the population,” said Mark McAfee, the owner and CEO of California’s largest raw dairy, adding that the bacteria within raw milk can have a probiotic effect for drinkers, helping to rebuild immune systems and improve overall digestion.

Canadian health authorities, who made the sale of raw milk illegal in 1991, insist heating milk in not detrimental in any way and does not diminish milk’s health benefits.

B.C.’s provincial health officer, Dr. Perry Kendall, told ctvbc.ca that pasteurizing milk is the only way to destroy potential pathogens in milk that could cause potentially deadly outbreaks of E. coli.

“Pasteurization does not detract in any way from the nutrition of the milk,” he said.

“[Raw milk drinkers] also claim it removes helpful bacteria like probiotics but you can get those from a number of other sources without the risk of getting salmonella, E. coli, or Listeria.”

Distribution risks

Raw milk enthusiast say pasteurized milk comes with greater risks than locally produced milk because of the large size of the batches and because milk from multiple farms is eventually pooled. Some advocates say they want to know their farmer by name.

Conventional dairy producers in Canada supply their farm’s milk to a central processing facility where it is pasteurized and then sent out in large batches to store shelves across the country.

“What happens if something goes wrong in the pasteurizing? You have a distribution of millions of cartons going into stores. That’s millions of consumers. That’s a huge problem,” farmer Michael Schmidt told ctvbc.ca from his farm in Durham, Ontario.

The veteran raw dairy farmer said local food producers can protect consumers from potential harm much more easily because they have a closer connection to the people who drink their product.

“If something goes wrong with our milk we have 200 families that we can all call in one day and cut off the problem at the source.”

Scientists disagree with this argument and justify pasteurization by pointing to the fact that a higher percentage of raw milk drinkers get sick on a serving-per-serving basis compared to those who drink pasteurized products.

“Considering one-tenth of one per cent of milk is raw in the U.S., but 33 per cent of all milk sicknesses are due to raw milk, it’s pretty staggering,” Cornell University food scientist Rob Ralyea told ctvbc.ca.

The caring factor

Raw milk enthusiasts often argue there are two kinds of milks in the modern North American food system: one that is destined for human consumption and one destined for pasteurization. Michael Schmidt says conventional farmers can afford to be less careful about fecal contamination and health standards because they know their product will go through a super heating process to kill all living bacteria — good or bad — within it.

“Let’s put it this way. When you know you have a cleaning leady coming in every day you wear your shoes. But when you know you have to clean it by yourself you take better care,” Schmidt said.

David Gumpert agrees, saying greater care is taken in milking if the product is available directly for consumers.

“Because dairies know the milk is going to be zapped they’re going to produce milk that isn’t as clean as it should be if it wasn’t going through pasteurization.”

But it may be less about how the cows are treated than what they’re fed….”

Get the whole story from CTV BC.

7 Comments

Filed under News

7 responses to “Pasteurization extends shelf life, enables milk to be shipped great distances, and cleans up after less-than-ideal practices in feeding and sanitation — CTV B.C.

  1. Ask the kind doctor, “what are the benefits of Pasteurization.” Place each milk side by side, and from different farms ( a sample of 100 farms, farms on local levels with small farmers, and size farms as large as the largest commercial farms). Then test them both, after milking. Make a disclosure as to the story of their content; all minerals and vitamins, the grass the animals ate, the hay, additional feeds or supplements, etc.. Define real quality of MILK. Define quality of life for the animals, the cows.

  2. We just received news from a reliable source; ABC News with Diane Sawyer. January 26, 2010. when ABC World News with Diane sawyer and Nightline cover a story, you know it’s a BIG deal! Tonight, both programs will show the shocking undercover video footage produced by MERCY for ANIMALS (http://www.mercyforanimals.org/), the videos were recorded inside a “huge New York dairy operation where cows never go outside, have their tails ends cut off in painful procedures without anesthesia, and are seen being abused.”

    These animals are really treated as little more than milk-producing machines,” said Nathan Runkle, executive director of Mercy for Animals.” “The overall environment at this facility was really a culture of cruelty and neglect.”

    I ask you all, “Is this right, is this fair to the animals and to humans, or this earth.” Does behavior like this, create or destroy good milk? Ourselves? To check out the full story, visit ABC NEWS.com (http://abcnews.go.com/bloter/animal-rights-us-dairy-industry/story? id=9658866) or tune into ABC World News with Diane Sawyer and Nightline.

    Doctor, please comment now. Thank you.

  3. PS:

    Maybe the Doctor should watch the new film, “Avitar.” Big Blue and Breaking records. Time for the Big White to come out.

    OOPS, I have to be careful, the G Men and G Ladies will be knocking on my door soon. Pitch Forks ready? Yes.

  4. thebovine

    Milkmen,

    What you say above is tantalizing, but the link doesn’t seem to work. Can you provide a better link?

  5. thebovine

    The author of this piece, Darcy Wintonyk, has just confirmed by email that the quote attributed to Dr. Perry Kendall, under the photo is in fact, accurate.

  6. shane

    Kendall does not seem to be a supporter of raw milk. I suspect that the quote under the photo is a transcribing mistake or a misstatement by Kendall. I thought that quote was interesting so I did some searching on Kendall and raw milk. The results are a number of other quotes that contradict the one in the photo in this story.

    Dr. Perry Kendall, BC’s Provincial Health Officer warns that drinking unpasteurized milk can result in illness, long-lasting serious diseases, or even death. “It is important that all British Columbians be aware of the serious health risks associated with consuming unpasteurized milk”, he says. “Any perceived health benefits of drinking raw milk are most certainly offset by the serious risks of contracting disease”.”

    This press release by Kendall also makes it seem like he is strongly against raw milk.

    And this story from ctv is a quote that makes it clear that Kendall acknowledges their are beneficial probiotics in raw milk he recommends getting those probitiots elsewhere to avoid the health risks.

    It is nice to know that he does acknowledge there are health benefits to raw milk.

  7. Pingback: A naysayer writes to the Toronto Star « The Bovine

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s