Is
Pasteurization More of a Health Risk or a Safety Benefit?
Read This, Then YOU Tell Us What You Think!
by www.SixWise.com
We're taught as early as
elementary school about the French chemist Louis Pasteur and his famous
invention: pasteurization. This is the process of heating food to kill
bacteria, viruses, mold, yeasts and other potentially harmful organisms.
The first pasteurization
test was performed back in 1862, after Pasteur noticed that microorganisms
could contaminate beverages (he later extended this to the theory that
microorganisms could contaminate humans and animals as well.). But
pasteurization did not immediately become the gold standard for milk production
in the United States.
"Pasteurized or
raw?" has overtaken skim, whole or 2 percent as the great milk question. |
In fact, at the end of the
19th century "swill dairies," in which cows were raised in horrible
conditions and reportedly fed swill from liquor distilleries, were a major
problem. The milk from these dairies was of such poor quality that it was
thought to be contributing to the high death rate of urban infants at the time
(the yearly death rate of U.S. infants in cities was about half of the yearly
birth rate).
Thus, a crusade began for
certified raw (unpasteurized) milk, which would ensure certain purity levels of
milk and regular inspections of dairies.
"Though more and more
milk was being pasteurized, pasteurization was seen by many as a stopgap
measure that would no longer be needed once the production and distribution of
milk was more carefully regulated. Certified milk was the model for the
production of better milk everywhere," said Ron Schmid, ND, author of The Untold Story of Milk.
Yet by the early 20th
century, milk supplies were still of poor quality, and thought to be involved
in many disease outbreaks, leading authorities to push for mandatory
pasteurization of all milk except certified raw milk.
"Not until the 1930s
did commercial dairy interests, segments of the medical community, politicians
and public health agency officials and their allies in the media begin a
campaign first to smear all raw milk and then to eliminate its availability and
sale," Schmid said.
Thus began the compulsory
pasteurization of milk and the great debate that has spanned centuries: Is
pasteurization one of the greatest discoveries, or greatest setbacks, of our
time?
The Case for
Pasteurization
"[Drinking raw milk
is] like playing Russian roulette with your health," says John Sheehan,
director of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Division of Dairy and Egg Safety.
"We see a number of cases of food-borne illness every year related to the
consumption of raw milk."
According to the FDA, raw
milk may contain any number of disease-causing organisms, including
campylobacter, escherichia, listeria, salmonella, yersinia and brucella. Aside
from causing acute diarrhea, stomach cramps, vomiting and fever, these
organisms may also cause more serious conditions, particularly among the
elderly, pregnant women, children or those with weakened immune systems.
The FDA says pasteurization
helps prevent:
Milk can be contaminated
from a sick or dirty animal, as well as by dirty living environments.
"Think about how many times a cow lays down in a field or the barn,"
says Tom Szalkucki, assistant director of the Wisconsin Center for Dairy
Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "Even if the barn is
cleaned thoroughly and regularly, it's not steamed. Contamination can take
place because it's not a sterile environment."
Pasteurization, says the
FDA, kills any dangerous bacteria while also destroying bacteria that can cause
milk to spoil, thereby extending shelf life.
This simple food is
surrounded by complex arguments. |
One of the biggest
controversies over pasteurized milk is whether or not the milk is able to
retain its nutritional value after the high temperatures it is exposed to.
Proponents of pasteurization say the process has little effect on the milk's
nutritional value or flavor.
"Milk is a good source
of the vitamins thiamine, folate, B-12, and riboflavin, and pasteurization
results in losses of anywhere from zero to 10 percent for each of these, which
most would consider only a marginal reduction," says Sheehan.
Further,
"Pasteurization will destroy some enzymes," says Barbara Ingham,
Ph.D., associate professor and extension food scientist at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison. "But the enzymes that are naturally present in milk are
bovine enzymes. Our bodies don't use animal enzymes to help metabolize calcium
and other nutrients."
The Case for Raw Milk
On the other side of the
fence are those who say pasteurization is unnecessary if cows are raised in
clean environments, and radically changes the structure of the milk, resulting
in an entirely different, and potentially harmful, food. According to the
Weston A. Price Foundation:
"Pasteurization destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamin
content, denatures fragile milk proteins, destroys vitamins C, B12 and B6,
kills beneficial bacteria, promotes pathogens and is associated with allergies,
increased tooth decay, colic in infants, growth problems in children, osteoporosis,
arthritis, heart disease and cancer. Calves fed pasteurized milk do poorly and
many die before maturity. Raw milk sours naturally but pasteurized milk turns
putrid; processors must remove slime and pus from pasteurized milk by a process
of centrifugal clarification."
Raw milk, proponents say,
is an outstanding source of beneficial bacteria such as lactobacillus
acidolphilus, vitamins, enzmes and calcium. Further, they say that sickness
resulting from raw milk is rare--instead, it is pasteurized milk that is often
implicated in outbreaks of food-borne illness.
According to Mark McAfee,
founder of Organic Pastures Dairy, which produces a full line of raw organic
dairy products for retail sale, "During the period 2000 through 2004 there
were several listeria-related food recalls in California associated with
pasteurized milk products and ice cream. During this same period more than 12
million servings of Organic Pastures products were consumed and not one person
complained of illness and not one pathogen was ever found either by the state,
FDA or Organic Pastures."
Organic Pastures then hired
a laboratory to perform an experiment. The lab added 10 million counts of
pathogens to one-milliliter samples of organic raw milk and found that the
pathogens not only would not grow but they also died off. The lab concluded:
" … Organic raw milk and colostrum do not appear to support the growth of
pathogens …"
As it stands, the sale of
raw milk across state lines is illegal. However, sales of raw milk, either in retail
stores or directly from the farm, are legal within 28 U.S. states. In other
states, raw milk may be available through cow "leasing" programs in
which members purchase shares of a cow and can then use the milk how they
choose.