But, please, don’t drink it in front of me.
A friend of mine in the liberty movement drinks raw milk. That’s not for me.
What really offends me is that adults — such as my friend — have to sneak around in order to buy something they believe is healthy.
In a guest commentary in my local paper, I wrote: “Raw milk is not the issue, it’s a symptom. The issue is our desire to rule over our neighbors through the use of government. And that desire gets fed each time another intrusive law passes without protest.”
{ 40 comments }
I’m not sure why anyone would want to drink that stuff… I guess Louis Pasteur was a “statist drone” although his work saved countless of lives. May as well be against vaccination too, eh?
If you really want to drink it, then go make friends with a farmer, but there’s a reason why it’s not sold in the supermarket.
Amen. We need to stop people from drinking certain substances we consider harmful. After all, we have complete knowledge of everything and are never wrong, unlike these idiots who want to drink raw milk, or even drink milk at all… you know, we should ban milk completely, since it’s only for infants. And potato chips, we know those aren’t very healthy.
But seriously, you should read up on raw milk (and “pasteurized” milk), rather than just assume that “pasteurized” milk is really so good in comparison, or that it’s reallt even pasteurized.
Feel free to drink any lead paint you can get your hands on.
You need to inform you self(Yes I know the economics of this is horrible, but it is the nutritional arguments that are important in this context): http://www.realmilk.com/ppt/CampaignforRealMilkNov2009.ppt
Most men with kids have probably drank some amount of raw milk.
And in most “undeveloped” countries, anyone above the age of 0 has drunken nothing but raw milk for at least a year.
Modern dairy herds are much healthier, milk storage is near sterile and refrigerated, bulk milk is tested and resulted to the farmer. In short, my family and most of our neighbors drink raw milk from a nearby farm and we are neither ill nor dead.
I have had raw milk and also butter made from raw milk. They taste soo much better than what we get in the supermarket, I’m sure they would be an instant sales hit.
Now I’m craving a nice glass of cold cocoa made with raw milk…
He should be able to pay extra for insurance. As long as his getting sick does not raise my premium, then I agree that he should be able to drink it all he wants.
If someone doesn’t want to use smoke detectors, then they have to insulate me from the consequences of their actions.
You don’t have a property right in value. If your insurance company wants to raise your premiums, for any reason, if you don’t want to pay you can find another insurer.
@seattle indeed. the issue is voluntary contract based on voluntary behavior.
@ackerman’s misconception is the inherent self-contradiction of his position. if ackerman’s position is taken at face value – those who act must shield others from that action’s effect, then how can those actions possibly be prohibited in an internally consistent way?
by definition, the action of legally prohibiting a given behavior would require tax-funded agents to enforce such a prohibition. ackerman’s prohibition thus ensnares everyone and fails his own test of insulating others from a given action (the prohibition itself).
in australia, raw milk products are essentially verboten. in some ways the local industry has been behind this, as it cuts competition with some of the world finest cheeses. voters obviously don’t care enough to respond to this curtailment of choice.
@newson I heard you can get “pet” milk at pet stores in Australia, and that it is raw milk. I also heard you can buy raw milk as a beauty product
“Some of the diseases that pasteurization can prevent are diphtheria, salmonellosis, strep throat, scarlet fever, listeriosis, brucellosis and typhoid fever.” – Wiki
Fancy that – that list of diseases are primarily those that afflicted people up until the 20th century. Strange how these diseases are comparatively rare in the West nowadays.
gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, syphilis…all diseases that can be mitigated by safe sex.
looks like the government will have to make it illegal to practice unsafe sex.
Apparently a lot of Libertarians want to be walking disease bags. Sometimes Libertarians have a habit of making Conservatives look good.
try logic, not emotion.
Shouldn’t you be watching tv?
lactose intolerance has exploded in coincidence with pasteurization, might there be some causality?
Nope, Wiki say lactose intolerance is primarily caused by genetics. You might as well argue that the lung cancer started to be common around 1930 despite people smoking for a couple of centuries. Or Asian women who don’t drink milk don’t get osteoporosis.
Well, if “Wiki say” so . . .
So, “genetics” suddenly went haywire just at the same time as pastuerization was going on? Yes, we all should know that correlation is not causation, but maybe it’s not genetics?
As someone who has actually studied genetics, I can say with certainty that genetic factors are behind almost all of the variation in lactose tolerance.
Yes, it may explain the variation, but it does not explain what the OP has suggested. There are ingredients in raw milk, that help the human body digest it, that are are destroyed by the pasteurization process. That is why the huge increase in lactose intolerance.
italy, france, germany etc. haven’t witnessed vast numbers of raw-dairy-product deaths.
Aren’t Libertarians against organic farming anyway? They like gloat to hippies that it’s horribly inefficient and there’s the capacity for diseases to afflict crops and the eaters of said crops.
“inefficient” belongs to the chicago school.
Nope, anti-organic farming folk would be correct in saying organic farming is inefficient. The amount of land required because of crop failure because farmers won’t use chemical sprays is far higher than modern hi-tech farming. Not to mention the diseases that can exist in crops because they’ve been infested by pests and make the organic produce eater very sick. You’re becoming pro-organic farming because such people are of a similar type as those who want to drink raw milk.
Newson was right, though, Gil. Inorganic farming can only be called “inefficient” if our goal is some particular number of, say, pounds per acre that inorganic farming produced less of than organic. But if someone’s goal is, say, whatever feeling they get from their farming, perhaps the organic farming is more efficient.
That’s why newson said what he did. Austrian economics tends not to try to measure “efficiency,” whatever that means.
And no, Gil, nobdoy here as far as I know is arguing for organic farming. They’re simply arguing for the right to choose whatever type of farming one desires.
Now please explain one and one thing only.
Most of you people are against the War on Drugs on the ground that we have no right to tell people what they put in their own body. And that’s fine with me.
So why is fine to light up a nice big fat one while using raw milk is not? Nobody has argued against stopping pasteurization and I think nobody would buy milk, butter and cheese from a seller with a history of giving his customers illnesses.
And please, please, please stop this over-reliance on Wikipedia. It’s not the source of ultimate wisdom.
He’s not saying it’s wrong to use raw milk. He’s saying the choice shouldn’t be taken away.
Very good point by Kakugo.
It is always interesting to see over which topic we suddenly think that we need THE STATE to watch over us (or others, it is never something we do).
It’s Gil that is a ‘tard, and is also certainly not inclined to freedom
I don’t like ad hominems, but seriously, the dude just said “Aren’t Libertarians against organic farming anyway?”
The health advantages of raw milk from an organic, pasture fed cow are numerous. There are doctors who prescribe raw milk for children with allergies. The healthy response of the child is almost instantaneous. There are in our population a large upswing in auto-immune diseases. Eighty percent of our auto-immune protection is in our gut. Pasteurized milk is microbially dead. We shoot ourselves in the foot by outlawing a natural food that promotes a very healthy auto-immune system for millions of people. They we pay doctors to put band-aids on our self-induced array of debilitating and or deadly diseases. Many people are lactose intolerant. If they would drink raw milk, the lactose intolerance goes away in nearly all cases. What we have here is a great deal of ignorance and political influence that limits the consumption of a very healthy food product.
It is very easy to identify people who have no idea what they are talking about and assume what our culture, lobbyists and the FDA tells them is the truth.
As someone who works for a company who sells products to, among others, the dairy industry, I have looked into many of these things you are talking about. You are correct about a lot of what you are saying, although I think the health benefits from raw, organic, pasture-fed milk are a overblown. Sure, some people will probably get some benefit, but for most people, drinking “conventional” milk is fine. A lot of the positive research results from drinking unpasteurized milk were from the early part of the 1900′s when other dietary deficiencies were at play, too, so it is difficult to say what exactly was going on. As for the organic, pasture-fed part of it, there are a lot of claims that simply cannot be backed up with sound data at this time (does not mean they are not true, just unknown).
I guess the bottom line is choice – if you knowingly consume raw milk, you are taking some kind of a risk from microbial contamination, but that is your choice to assume the risk. Where I live, it is legal to buy raw milk from a farm as long as you provide your own container. Why the container part? Your guess is as good as mine. But, then again, why is gambling OK as long as it is over water on a boat? And the list goes on and on………
Anyone that feels a need to worry about what I eat or drink could probably benefit from daily medication
There’s also laws against the selling of camel’s milk in some places. I learned this through an episode of Dirty Jobs where Mike Rowe works on a camel farm for a day. According to the proprietors, the camel’s milk is more similar to human milk than any other milk in the animal kingdom. For some reason (I assume it is due to dairy farmer lobbying groups, but the stated reason is probably safety), the practice of selling the milk is outlawed. In this case there is no question about pasteurization, just the source of the milk is from an unapproved source. Ridiculous.
It has been my conclusion that the risks inherent in drinking raw milk (especially from appropriately bred and fed cows) are greatly exceeded by the risks of not drinking raw milk for the people who’s ancestors adopted to digesting it. Whatever minuscule pathogen risks did exist in 1930s have been greatly ameliorated by the development of milking machines, refrigeration, transportation, testing and, if worse come to worse, antibiotics. Conversely, the risks of not drinking raw milk greatly increased due to drastic deterioration in quality and nutritional value of commonly-available foods. Someone could provide good nutrition without raw milk – but with much more effort. Milk is pretty much the only complete food, specifically designed to be not only edible but nutritious.Lactose intolerance is often caused by homogenization – not pasteurization – of milk. The many nutrients – including calcium – in milk are rendered indigestible by pasteurization, so the large quantities of milk consumed by American women are effectively empty of calcium and osteoporosis is only to be expected. Asian women who never drink milk have developed alternative sources – and genetic adaptations, not something easily copied. Dozens of people I know in this country (US) who consume raw milk are strikingly healthier than the surrounding population. Of tens millions of people who routinely consumed raw milk in the Soviet Union – collected in much less sanitary conditions and sold by pouring into the customer’s containers with a dipper – I have never heard a case of milk-related illness. Lactic bacteria in milk is harmless to humans yet effectively suppresses most other pathogens.
It does not matter whether raw milk is dangerous or not… the point is that no one should have the right to tell me (or anyone else) what to/not to drink.
The health impacts are completely irrelevant to the fundamental principal, which is that people own their own bodies and should be free to use their bodies in any non-aggressive way they choose.
Comments on this entry are closed.