 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Statistics and methods for raw milk safety
As indicated above, raw milk can be produced in a safe manner provided it is produced
under strict hygienic conditions intended for human consumption. Should traces of a
pathogen be accidentally introduced in the raw milk, the anti-microbial properties provide
consumers with an extra safety margin unavailable with pasteurized milk. The safety of
raw milk and the methods necessary to achieve it have been understood for a long time.
As an example, we quote statistics and methods published in 1947 in “The Harvest is a
Barren One” (www.realmilk.com/prop2.html).
“According to U.S. Department of Agriculture milk statistics for 1945, there were
over 27 billion quarts of milk consumed in fluid form, of which approximately 18½
billion quarts were pasteurized and 8½ billion were consumed raw (this includes fluid
milk consumed on farms where produced.).
“On the basis of these figures, the relative frequency of milk-borne disease can be
easily determined by dividing the number of raw and pasteurized quarts consumed by
the number of diseases traced to raw and pasteurized milk respectively. We find that
there was one case of disease for every 12,400,000 quarts of pasteurized milk
consumed and one case of disease for every 18,900,000 quarts of raw milk
consumed.”
These US statistics corroborate Health Canada’s Senate evidence that raw milk
consumption can be safe and is presently so in Canada. They also demonstrate there is a
safety risk from drinking pasteurized milk, which can arise from improper handling,
under-pasteurization, unsanitary conditions, un-sterilized packaging or resistance of some
micro-organisms at the pasteurization temperature. This should challenge Health Canada
to compile and publish comparative safety statistics based on actual results and to
establish fair and unprejudiced laws accordingly, not only for other foods like alcohol,
sushi, raw fermented meats (salami and bratwurst) and pasteurized dairy products, but
also in relation to other consumer products like tobacco and firearms.
Further observations about safe raw milk production methods are quoted as follows:
“Dr. Prucha, recalling the early days of pasteurization, has this to say: “There was
much opposition to pasteurization of milk and at best, it was looked upon as a
temporary expedient to obtain a safe milk supply until the time when the dairy
industry would learn to produce clean and safe milk.”
“Thus pasteurization was originally adopted as a means to a proper end, and then
defended only as a temporary expedient. It was naturally assumed that the dairy
industry would discontinue the destructive process of pasteurization when it had
leaned how to produce a clean and safe milk supply and as its acquired knowledge
was put into effect. It did not take the industry very long to learn how to produce a
clean and safe milk supply, and the knowledge has been on hand and available for
many years.
 |