I wish I had files handy to post for you to read. Being a member of a
cow share for fresh dairy had given me the desire to learn more about
raw milk over past years.
Pasteurization is not a good thing, if the milk is handled correctly.
It destroys enzymes and other things, changing the taste, the
digestibility, and does cause some homogenization.
The info. is out there, that there are still many infections that go
on using the processed milk. On the other hand of all the people using
raw milk, when was the last time you heard of a case of undulent fever?
I haven't finished reading all these posts yet, but raw milk is
laxative, at least till you get use to it. Processed is constipating.
People have healed ulcers using raw milk. Processed aggravates them.
Raw milk is easier to digest because of it's own enzymes, so lactose
intolerant can get use to it.
An allergy, that's another story, and causes other problems.
~ Snoshoe
--- In
[hidden email], "Ian Kemp" <ianandsue.kemp@u...> wrote:
However, forgive me for being unconvinced that raw milk is
> better then pasteurized. Pasteurization (heat treatment) was
developed long
> before modern chemicals were used on farms (and so was used on
organic milk)
> and gave health benefits by reducing the total bacterial load. One
can
> always top up good bacteria from other food sources, but if one
accidentally
> introduces bad bacteria into the gut of someone with a weakened
immune
> system, couldn't that be very damaging? I guess modern bottling and
> transport methods are probably more sterile than old-fashioned
churns, but
> it seems to me there are arguments on both sides.
Locked
