 |
Comments |
|
 | Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 13:59:11 mst
Comment ID: #1
Name: Bob Sanders
E-mail: Sanders101(at)clc.net
Diana,
Are you familiar with Art Devanny and his Evolutionary Fitness ideas? He is popular with some Objectivists. He essentially combines Loren Cordain's Paleo Diet with High Intensity interval weight training and intermittent fasting. Some people swear by it. He's got pictures on his site of a 55 year old with a body that would make a 25 year old proud. Not sure about all his ideas on "randomness" though, and he does seem to idolize hunter/gatherers but he seems to offer much that is valuable. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 14:27:31 mst
Comment ID: #2
Name: Monica
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Oooh -- that grass fed beef looks like a very good price. We might have to invest in a side of that (and a chest freezer!) if our beef consumption grows!
Currently I get grass fed beef from a friend who raises Black Angus. I wasn't too happy with the ribeyes -- they were very gamey and I was under the impression after that one experience that grain fed beef just tasted better. (I wasn't going to complain about free beef, though!) Then, we had some T Bone, top sirloin, and filet mignon from a different slaughter of a younger animal from them that were all out. of. this. world. I'm not sure I've ever had such good beef. Having not grown up on a farm, I had no idea what I was missing all these years re: beef, milk, eggs, etc. There IS a difference -- despite what the FDA and USDA would like us to believe.
Bob -- I am familiar with DeVany. I have yet to incorporate the high intensity weight training or fasting but I have really cut down on my sugars and starches after finding his site. Type II diabetes runs in my family (as does abdominal fat) and by limiting my grain and sugar intake I have all but eliminated my blood sugar highs and lows, which feels great. I have not lost weight yet -- I suspect I just need to eat less and exercise a lot more (I'm relatively out of shape but could buff up quickly if I just put in more effort) -- but I used to follow Weight Watcher's religiously, and while I lost weight on their program I was never able to keep it off and I was frequently very cranky due to the high amounts of starches and sugars I was eating. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 14:53:28 mst
Comment ID: #3
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Monica -- I was just looking at prices for chest freezers earlier today! (I'll have to check sizes, but I think I have room for one in the laundry room.)
Bob -- I've heard of DeVany via Monica. I'm actually quite interested in CrossFit (which advocates high-intensity exercise) particularly since my usual exercise modalities are restricted by a Morton's Neuroma in my right foot. (It makes running, hiking, and ellipticizing impossible. So I'm weight training, rowing, gardening, and riding.) I might contact my old friend Kirez for help getting started, as he's gotten into CrossFit. I love the pictures of him on his web site: http://www.vcrossfit.com
Also, I have been weight training on a nifty little system called the TRX: http://www.fitnessanywhere.com/
Here's a good review: http://www.exerciseequipmentexpert.com/blog/12/trx-exercise-system- ...
It's reasonably inexpensive, small, light, and capable of doing almost anything. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 14:55:44 mst
Comment ID: #4
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Monica -- On grass fed beef: My sister told me that it can be more gamey and she mentioned that you often need to cook it somewhat differently than regular beef. She even recommend a cookbook particularly for grass-fed meats, but I can't recall the title -- although it was something obvious. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 15:51:05 mst
Comment ID: #5
Name: Burgess Laughlin
E-mail: burgesslaughlin(at)macforcego.com
URL: http://www.aristotleadventure.blogspot.com
Here is another example of food regulation, but in the EU:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7457218.stm
"The complicated marketing rules have spawned long-running debates about straight bananas and cucumbers. The Commission says misshapen fruit should be sold 'with some sort of label for use in cooking'."
Meanwhile Europe is slipping into dhimmitude, losing its remaining freedoms to Islamofascists. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 16:10:56 mst
Comment ID: #6
Name: Bob Sanders
E-mail: Sanders101(at)clc.net
Diana,
I have heard of Crossfit. It is very similar to DeVanny's approach as I understand it plus the basic CrossFit diet is the Zone Diet (40-30-30) with Paleo foods. There is a CrossFit gym near me and I am thinking of taking their introductory free workout. Best of luck in your health and fitness endeavours. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 16:14:29 mst
Comment ID: #7
Name: Bob Sanders
E-mail: Sanders101(at)clc.net
Monica,
My experience is similar to yours. I have just started Loren Cordain's Paleo Diet and I have eliminated grains and refined sugars. After two weeks of terrible carbohydrate withdrawl headaches, I am starting to see improvements in my energy levels. So far I am enjoying the diet. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 16:38:59 mst
Comment ID: #8
Name: PGS
E-mail: mr_peripatetic(at)yahoo.com
Having tried the standard American diet, vegetarianism, the Zone, and Atkins, I finally came upon what I think may be the best dietary life-style of all: http://www.warriordiet.com. It's easy, not predicated upon deprivation (you can eat as much as you want, in a manner of speaking), frees up time and money, and it works. The diet's originator has recently taken his idea one step further (haven't tried it yet, but it looks intriguing): http://www.antiestrogenicdiet.com/the-anti-estrogenic-diet-introduction.
You might also want to investigate John Little's Max Contraction Training (http://www.maxcontraction.com/). Infrequent, lightning quick workouts for maximum effect. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 23:13:09 mst
Comment ID: #9
Name: Jim May
E-mail: seerak(at)gmail.com
Reading anecdotal information, as we have here in these comments and as I've seen elsewhere, I am really beginning to think that the ideal diet dos not exist for "humans" at all -- rather, it seems like the ideal diet is highly individualized. If I try to infer a common pattern by combining all the data, I do not end up with some kind of subset of claims which all line up -- on the contrary, I end up with a "null set"... all the diets vary much more wildly than they ought if there did exist were "one diet to rule them all". Every single claim by any one diet gets contradicted somewhere by some other diet.
I therefore am currently of the opinion that to a large part, diet is largly a process of learning to "listen to your body" as you try out different dietary ideas, to see what it likes. I know, for example, that I could not do the "Warrior Diet"; if I undereat during the day or otherwise go too long without something in my belly, my stomach will "throw a tantrum" and start making acid with nothing to digest. That's been the case ever since I was a kid, and has never varied even though my diet has.
I have also learned that I experience different kinds of hunger, a few of which I've learned to connect with certain needs; the "I need protein" hunger is the easiest one to recognize, as it's the one that roars and wants MEAT. I can also tell when I need calories, and when I don't need calories but am low on nutrients (can't tell which ones, though).
I do know it's not enough to go merely by your current appetites/cravings -- it is very likely that there is a dietary combination that will give you much more energy and vitality, and eliminate the desire for things you once felt that you just *had* to have, than you knew was possible. It is also likely that you'll have to get through an adjustment period to get there. My fiance was a born-and-bred Kansas City BBQ slave, until she went on a vegetarian diet for ten days in an effort to ditch some weight -- and discovered to her surprise that she had more energy at age 48 than she did before at age 18. She has not gone back since. (She still likes grilling; it's just portobello mushrooms and eggplant slices now).
The trick for me is that most of the time I don't care about eating. Needless to say, most people find that very strange in an oenophile :) I usually explain it by saying I like TASTING good food (and wine), but when it comes to eating, I just want to get it over with... so of course I have some work to do in weaning myself off the resulting preference for prefab food :P |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 23:15:49 mst
Comment ID: #10
Name: Jim May
E-mail: seerak(at)gmail.com
feh, after all that I left out the on-topic part: I plan to try raw milk to experience the difference Diana describes. Given all the negatives associated with life in California, I might as well take advantage of this particular positive. |
|
| Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 23:50:10 mst
Comment ID: #11
Name: rrlv-frsh
For those who have strong health reasons for reconsidering what they like to eat, my own recommendation is the nutritional program advocated by Dr. John A. McDougall, MD. Here is his website:
http://www.drmcdougall.com
Dr. McDougall maintains that complex, high-fiber carbohydrates -- like whole wheat bread, whole grains, baked potatoes (without butter, sour cream or bacon bits), brown rice, pastas (if not drowned in unhealthy sauces), and beans -- are the best possible source of healthy calories in an effective human diet, compared to calories from fats or more concentrated sugars. He also highly recommends added vegetables and fruits, for a rich source of vitamins, minerals, modest amounts of essential unsaturated fat, and valuable enzymes. He advocates near total elimination of all animal products, including dairy, from one's diet (which many may find intolerable from a taste standpoint, unless they have been finding that a more heavily meat-centered diet leads to too many health complications). The idea of mixing "starches" (high-fiber, complex carbohydrates) with added vegetables and fruits, is a simple one, yet surprisingly effective and satisfying -- easy to digest because of the starches, yet surprisingly satisfying and filling, with excellent weight control despite generous portion sizes. Similar diets are actually quite common throughout major regions of the world. I've also heard such a diet described as "eating low on the food chain."
Dr. McDougall's books answer all the common concerns about where to get protein, unsaturated fat, calcium, consuming too much carbohydrate, and so on. And for tasty recipes, a book by Dr. McDougall's wife, Mary, offers a wide selection. |
|
| Wednesday, June 18, 2008 at 5:06:56 mst
Comment ID: #12
Name: Burgess Laughlin
E-mail: burgesslaughlin(at)macforcego.com
URL: http://www.aristotleadventure.blogspot.com
I concur that each person must design his own optimal diet. Here are my major experiences:
1. At age 29, 200 lbs (6ft), I was very active in bicycling, but eating anything I wanted: high fat, high protein, low fiber, mostly animal products and refined grains and other factory foods.
2. At age 30, I had pains in my chest and on the inside of my left arm when I exercised. Cholesterol: 240. Blood pressure: 145/95. I went onto the Pritikin Program (90% coarse plant foods, small amounts of dairy and meats, extremely lean, with a total less than 10% of calories from fat). I lost 65 lbs. in 15 months without even trying to, BP down to 130/80, cholesterol down to 180. However, all my longterm inflammation (-itis) problems continued and even intensified (dermatitis, iritis, and later arthritis, bursitis, tendonitis, and colitis).
3. At age 60, so crippled I was shopping for a wheel chair, I was ready to end my life. Several doctors told me that my -itis problems had nothing to do with diet. After more searching, I began a special, narrow subset of the regular McDougall Program diet. Here I describe my particular anti-itis diet:
http://www.anti-itisdiet.blogspot.com/
Be sure to read from the beginning of the weblog, not the top.
I eat only fruit, vegs, and starchy roots (potatoes, sweet potatoes, etc.). All my inflammation problems are gone. At 64, I have no signs of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, or other problems. (I have a mild case of emphysema from having smoked for 8 years, 40 years ago.) I weigh about 135 lbs, my BP=130/80 (but as low as 115/65 in the evening), and cholesterol c. 150 ml/dl. I walk six miles/day for pleasure, do posture exercises (Pete Egoscue, Pain Free), and do some light calisthenics (a few half-pushups, e.g.).
The body can use almost anything for fuel on the short-term. Proper diet matters a lot--over the long-term. We are all different in the details, it seems. |
|
| Wednesday, June 18, 2008 at 9:27:10 mst
Comment ID: #13
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Misshapen fruit!???? Good lord. In cucumbers, at least, that's simply due to inefficient pollination.
Why would people need a label telling them something they can see right in front of their eyes? Ugh -- utterly ridiculous. |
|
| Wednesday, June 18, 2008 at 9:57:43 mst
Comment ID: #14
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Diana -- nice links. My intermittent fast starts this evening with no dinner to go til dinner tomorrow!
Also -- a very cool weight training apparatus. Bookmarked for further investigation. I've been looking for just such a thing as I do not want to join a gym.
The CrossFit site you provide is the best I've seen in terms of offering practical options and exercises for those of us who don't have time for massive research into this stuff. Nice. |
|
| Thursday, June 19, 2008 at 4:40:39 mst
Comment ID: #15
Name: TheBiggerTheLie
E-mail: TheBiggerTheLie(at)TheMorePeopleWillBelieveIt.com
URL: http://youtube.com/watch?v=NJOmLUIsj8k
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NJOmLUIsj8k |
|
| Saturday, June 21, 2008 at 2:38:53 mst
Comment ID: #16
Name: Anonymous
Actually, regarding raw milk in California, I have some bad news.
I am lactose intolerant of pasteurized cows' milk. I have tried raw cows' milk and can tolerate it better. I have also tried pasteurized goats' milk and tolerate it even better.
I wanted to find an in-state source of raw goats' milk... but right about the time that I did contact the name of a local-to-me goat farmer (late 2007), he informed me that in a stealth move, the powers-that-be in California have more or less made raw milk illegal, for the time being, by imposing some idiotically strict standard for bacteria in raw milk (a lower count than in even pasteurized milk), to go into effect in January 2008. This is an obvious attempt to kill off the competition from raw milk.
There has been some sort of ongoing legal action, but I am not currently sure of the status. There was some sort of stay against the legislation, then something else happened, and I think the legislation (for now) has been upheld.
Organic Pastures (see their website, http://www.organicpastures.com ) and Clarabel are, I think, the two biggest producers of raw cows' milk in California, but there are smaller producers here and there. The fellow who runs Organic Pastures had even invented a mobile milking parlor, which brought the milking equipment to the cows instead of the other way around.
At any rate, at the moment I cannot buy raw goats' milk here in California.
This had happened before. I recall over 30 years ago, when I first came to California, seeing raw milk in some stores, but thinking nothing of it, as I had had no exposure to raw milk growing up. Alta-Dena Dairy was a big producer of raw milk, but they were hounded out of that part of the dairy business, and their current products are all pasteurized.
In the interim between then and now, raw milk again caught on, and had been becoming more popular until recently. Here's hoping that it once again becomes easily available. If I could buy a goat share, I would. In the meantime, the small goat farmers must stick with cheese making. |
|
| Saturday, June 21, 2008 at 2:52:43 mst
Comment ID: #17
Name: Anonymous
Oops... The second dairy mentioned above should be Claravale, not Clarabel. My bad. Anyway, apparently the FDA wants to outlaw raw milk in the U.S., and they're starting with California. See the Organic Pastures website mentioned above. |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 7:51:37 mst
Comment ID: #18
Name: Bryan
E-mail: bryan.armentrout(at)gmail.com
Is the farm testing the milk for pathogens prior to sale?
A recent article on the dangers of raw milk that may be of interest:
PENNSYLVANIA: PA Agriculture Department confirms presence of bacteria in raw milk sold by York County dairy
23.jun.08
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/pa-agriculture-department-c ...
HARRISBURG, Pa. -- The Department of Agriculture is recommending that consumers who have purchased raw milk from Stump Acres Dairy farm in New Salem, York County, discard it immediately due to the risk of Listeria Monocytogenes contamination, Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff said today.
Test results today confirmed the presence of Listeria Monocytogenes in samples taken from the farm.
Raw milk is milk that has not been pasteurized or homogenized. Pennsylvania law allows farms to sell raw milk, but requires they obtain permits and be inspected to reduce health risks associated with the unpasteurized products.
In 2007, the Department of Agriculture revoked Stump Acres' permit after the Department of Health identified several individuals who had become sick after consuming raw milk from the dairy. State inspectors found that the dairy has begun selling raw milk again without a permit.
"Today's lab tests confirm that this specific, harmful strain of Listeria was present in the samples purchased at the farm," said Wolff. "If consumers have purchased raw milk from this farm, they should discard it immediately."
Wolff recommended that any products made from the raw milk, including hard or soft cheeses, should also be discarded.
No illnesses have been reported as a result of the potential contamination, but if people who consumed the raw milk become ill, they should consult their physician.
Samples were taken from the farm on June 12, and preliminary tests showed the presence of Listeria Monocytogenes on June 20.
Symptoms of Listeriosis are fever, muscle aches, and sometimes gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea or diarrhea. If infection spreads to the nervous system, symptoms such as headache, stiff neck, confusion, loss of balance or convulsions can occur.
Infected pregnant women may experience only a mild, flu-like illness, but infections during pregnancy can lead to miscarriage or stillbirth.
Symptoms of Listeriosis can appear in four days to three weeks. |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 9:09:36 mst
Comment ID: #19
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Bryan, I recommend taking the sensationalist propaganda in this press release with a very liberal chunk of salt.
First, let's take a crucial quote from the press release you provide: "No illnesses have been reported as a result of the potential contamination"
Wow, big surprise. Funny thing... the only illnesses that have been *conclusively* linked to raw milk products in the past several years have been from raw cheese smuggled in from Mexico.
The PA Dept. of Agriculture (as well as bureaucrats in many other states) has been trying to get the raw milk program shut down for a couple of years now. We can't have people putting what they want into their bodies, now, can we?
Here is what is going on. Basically, conventional milk farmers can't handle the growing competition they are getting from a tiny number of raw milk farmers, and are using the state departments of agriculture and other bureaucrats to try to kill the competition. That's completely unsurprising, since even conventional milk producers stepping outside of a a federally mandated cartel must pay steep fines: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/09/AR2 ...
The situation is particularly bad in Pennsylvania. Not only are farmers trying to squelch raw milk producers, they're trying to squelch anyone who produces a different product from them (see the Secretary Wolff link below.) Further, the testing standards have changed in the past couple of years in an attempt to get raw milk production shut down entirely. You can read about raids on one Pennsylvania farmer here: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com/2008/05/and-now-farmers-rights.html
As for Secretary Wolff, he is a jerk. You can read more about the other things he's tried to pull here: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com/2008/06/food-labeling-bans.html
Finally, you can read about the recently altered testing standards for raw milk that started in 2006, and how the results of the government testing often don't match up with testing at private facilities:
The short story: http://www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2007/12aug07-b.html
The long story: http://www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2008/07may08.html
Bottom line: If the government is telling you something about food, be skeptical of it. We know better than to trust the FDA's advice on medicine. Why trust it on food? |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 9:31:48 mst
Comment ID: #20
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Oh -- one more thing I forgot to add. Colorado's cow share program is heavily regulated. (Of course, I don't support those regulations as they're not even linked to safety.) California in particular has tried to get raw milk shut down by lowering the level of coliform bacteria allowed in milk to unacceptably low levels -- levels that no raw milk producer could ever meet because *milk is not a sterile product.* The new standards require a coliform count of less than ten. Yet most coliform bacteria are not even pathogens -- they are beneficial probiotics. Here are two news items of interest that illustrate the types of tactics government officials have been using in California:
http://www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2008/04jan08.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2008/17jun08.html
Let's hope Colorado's testing standards won't change at the slightest shift of the wind, as Pennsylvania's and California's have. |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 10:00:15 mst
Comment ID: #21
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Correction: I don't support the so-called safety regulations in many states. Although there is heavy regulation in Colorado (it's still technically illegal) the testing standards that Colorado uses seem more objective by allowing for a higher coliform count -- while testing for pathogens specifically. What I meant was not that testing can't assure safety, but that the standards are far from objective in many cases. Under current California rules for coliform limits considered to be "safe" there probably isn't a sale of raw milk across the nation that has been "safe" in the nation's history. Ridiculous. (Sorry to get so worked up about this, but the extent to which the public has had the wool pulled over its eyes by the government on food issues is beyond belief.) |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 17:52:00 mst
Comment ID: #22
Name: Bryan
E-mail: bryan.armentrout(at)gmail.com
Thank you for your responses to my post, Monica.
A little background on me. I am Director of Quality Assurance for a major beverage/ dairy manufacturer with sales in excess of 1.4 billion annually. I am approaching 20 years of experience in the field. I spent a good chunk of my early career testing products in a lab for pathogens. My question to Diana was based on a simple premise, and that was related to her understanding of the potential risk she is taking. Milk is an incredibly good material for the growth of bacteria. A lot of hype is generated on both sides of the fence on this topic, and I have seen some incredible claims but one thing is clear. People have died as a direct result of the consumption of raw milk produced and sold in the USA. I found a very good case summary on this about six months ago. I can dig it up for you if you are so inclined. Now people have also died from the consumption of pasteurized milk, but only in circumstances where system failures took place.
The website for the farm lists a testing program for Somatic Cells, Standard Plate Counts, Coliforms and generic E. Coli - but no pathogens. It also does not list the testing frequency or testing dilution factors. Listeria monocytogenes and other real threats exist in this product.
Diana and Paul are healthy, very highly educated adults and they can do as they please. The government has no right interfering. But out of my concern for their safety and the enjoyment I receive from their blogs and editorials, I would hate to see something happen to them.
Beyond that, I have no interest in a debate on this topic. |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 22:10:50 mst
Comment ID: #23
Name: Diana Hsieh
E-mail: diana(at)dianahsieh.com
URL: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
Bryan --
I appreciate your concern, but given that...
(1) I drank raw milk as kid for over a decade,
(2) I'm satisfied by the perfect history and sanitary practices of the farm that produces my raw milk, and
(3) I'm reasonably sure that I have a strong constitution, as I've never had food poisoning, despite eating all kinds of questionable foods my whole life
... I'm not worried. From what I've read, raw milk is more dangerous than pasteurized milk, but less dangerous than deli meats. So if I don't regard deli meats as too dangerous to eat (just gross), then I shouldn't regard raw milk as too dangerous to eat either.
Of course, something bad could always happen. However, I'm surely far more likely to get into a nasty car accident or to be thrown from my horse. Raw milk is surely not one of the major risks of my life. |
|
| Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 22:33:53 mst
Comment ID: #24
Name: Anonymous
The raw milk producers here in California, especially Organic Pastures and Claravale Farms, are extremely careful in the handling of their milk. If a cow gets sick, its milk is not used, because the desirability of the final product depends on its cleanliness and purity. OTOH, it's my understanding that pasteurized milk may include milk from cows with illness, or which have mastitis, etc. -- in other words, pasteurized milk may have started out as a less-wholesome product, and the parties concerned are relying upon the pasteurization process to make it "safer."
The proteins in milk are altered by pasteurization, and this is supposed to be part of the reason why a lot of people tolerate raw milk better than pasteurized.
At any rate, I'm hoping that the raw milk producers here in California (and elsewhere) can fight off the regulators and keep providing raw milk to those who want it.
I wonder what all these so-called do-gooders think of raw human breast milk? Is it somehow supposed to be bad for human infants just because it's not pasteurized? Sheesh. |
|
| Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 14:19:10 mst
Comment ID: #25
Name: Monica Hughes
E-mail: monicabeth10(at)gmail.com
URL: http://sparkasynapse.blogspot.com
Anonymous, you make a good point -- milk is not supposed to be a sterile product. If people want their milk to be sterile, I have no problem with that. But I don't.
Bryan, I have read reports of illness from raw milk, including a woman and her kids who visited an Amish farm in PA. But just so you know for your own assurance -- all raw milk producers in Colorado test monthly for at least two pathogens, including E. coli and salmonella. While that's not as stringent as the weekly tests being proposed for California in a new bill, it's far more stringent than the yearly or twice yearly tests previously done, and now being done, in Pennsylvania. In any case, I would like to read the report you mention, as I'm always evaluating new evidence and re-evaluating my trust in various sources.
Also, you're surely aware that most milk is now ULTRApasteurized, rather than just pasteurized, due to the evolution of new heat resistant strains over the years. The evolution of such strains is not simply a failure of the pasteurization system: it's a direct and predictable result of it. As a PhD candidate in biology with a good bit of experience in microbiology myself, in addition to the research I've done, I consider myself to be relatively informed about this issue. I don't want to eat sterilized foods (pasteurized, irradiated) for the rest of my life because of the need to cover up a pre-existing problem of filth and/or high levels of disease organisms. I'd prefer that the organisms I eat be clean in the first place -- which means providing optimum habitat and food for those animals and then paying a bit more for that product. Listeria, salmonella, campylobacter, E. coli, etc. are all a source of concern, but levels of these pathogens are generally demonstrably higher in animals that are raised in confined feedlots or fed inappropriate food. Further, a very low, non-illness exposure to such bacteria enhances acquired immunity. I wouldn't be surprised if there are very low pathogen levels in my raw milk, but it doesn't bother me.
I have no doubt that people have died from drinking raw milk or that the occasional grass fed cow given otherwise pristine conditions will develop mastitis. There ARE threats in raw milk at given points in time, but those threats are grossly exaggerated by the government. There are also very real benefits from raw milk that are not to be found in pasteurized milk. My evaluation of the evidence (even government sources) leads me to believe that the most likely sources of food poisoning are from restaurant salad bars or from eating deli meats, alfalfa sprouts, spinach, lettuce, or tomatoes from the grocery store. I do wonder why the FDA hasn't called for bans on the interstate transport of alfalfa sprouts and chicken -- or at least their mandatory irradiation? I also wonder why they haven't issued any dire warnings or press releases that spinach and tomatoes are "inherently dangerous"? All of those foods entail a greater risk than pasteurized milk OR raw milk -- at least under the current system of food distribution and safety standards. I'm not in the least concerned about eating tomatoes grown in my greenhouse or on a local farm.
All I really want is for the government to stop being food Nazis and to recognize my right to eat the foods I like, want, or that make my family healthier. That's really all I want. :) |
|
|
Post Your Comment |
|
|
|
E-mail Diana Hsieh
Comments
