As far as I know there is no such law barring the purchase of raw milk here
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Brutus79 And Johnnyballz Cycle Log
- Thread starter brutus79
- Start date
My brother is good friends with a local farmer/butcher and finally decided to take the plunge in buying half a cow. Grass fed and it was SUPER cheap. I just got it last week and so far the sirloins and ground beef if all I've tried and have been good. I'm just glad to be done eating just chicken for a while.
Also one of my good friends girlfriend is nursing and joking made a comment on how I wanted a bottle of breast milk. The next time I saw them he hand me a bottle full. Shit tasted horrific.
Also one of my good friends girlfriend is nursing and joking made a comment on how I wanted a bottle of breast milk. The next time I saw them he hand me a bottle full. Shit tasted horrific.
Breast milk always tastes better when it comes fresh from the nipple.
So show me then titties bitch, I need some milk to go with my sammich!
So show me then titties bitch, I need some milk to go with my sammich!
tileguy123
New Member
I prefer b or c's
Those utters are WAY too big
Those utters are WAY too big
jymis
New Member
@brutus79 you are a lucky man being able to afford switching over to an even better food choice then a supermarket. Where I live it isn't really possible to gain access to what you are talking about with out paying out the ass for it. I'm not sure about the raw milk, that sounds like is a super thick and hard to drink.
Pediatrics. 2014 Jan;133(1):175-9.
Consumption of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products by pregnant women and children.
Committee on Infectious Diseases; Committee on Nutrition; American Academy of Pediatrics.
Abstract
Sales of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products are still legal in at least 30 states in the United States. Raw milk and milk products from cows, goats, and sheep continue to be a source of bacterial infections attributable to a number of virulent pathogens, including Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella species, Brucella species, and Escherichia coli O157. These infections can occur in both healthy and immunocompromised individuals, including older adults, infants, young children, and pregnant women and their unborn fetuses, in whom life-threatening infections and fetal miscarriage can occur. Efforts to limit the sale of raw milk products have met with opposition from those who are proponents of the purported health benefits of consuming raw milk products, which contain natural or unprocessed factors not inactivated by pasteurization. However, the benefits of these natural factors have not been clearly demonstrated in evidence-based studies and, therefore, do not outweigh the risks of raw milk consumption. Substantial data suggest that pasteurized milk confers equivalent health benefits compared with raw milk, without the additional risk of bacterial infections. The purpose of this policy statement was to review the risks of raw milk consumption in the United States and to provide evidence of the risks of infectious complications associated with consumption of unpasteurized milk and milk products, especially among pregnant women, infants, and children.
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Jan 1;48(1):93-100.
Food safety: unpasteurized milk: a continued public health threat.
Lejeune JT1, Rajala-Schultz PJ.
Abstract
Although milk and dairy products are important components of a healthy diet, if consumed unpasteurized, they also can present a health hazard due to possible contamination with pathogenic bacteria. These bacteria can originate even from clinically healthy animals from which milk is derived or from environmental contamination occurring during collection and storage of milk. The decreased frequency of bovine carriage of certain zoonotic pathogens and improved milking hygiene have contributed considerably to decreased contamination of milk but have not, and cannot, fully eliminate the risk of milkborne disease. Pasteurization is the most effective method of enhancing the microbiological safety of milk. The consumption of milk that is not pasteurized increases the risk of contracting disease from a foodstuff that is otherwise very nutritious and healthy. Despite concerns to the contrary, pasteurization does not change the nutritional value of milk. Understanding the science behind this controversial and highly debated topic will provide public health care workers the information needed to discern fact from fiction and will provide a tool to enhance communication with clients in an effort to reduce the incidence of infections associated with the consumption of unpasteurized milk and dairy products.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2014 Jan;20(1):38-44.
Raw milk consumption among patients with non-outbreak-related enteric infections, Minnesota, USA, 2001-2010.
Robinson TJ, Scheftel JM, Smith KE.
Abstract
Raw milk has frequently been identified as the source of foodborne illness outbreaks; however, the number of illnesses ascertained as part of documented outbreaks likely represents a small proportion of the actual number of illnesses associated with this food product. Analysis of routine surveillance data involving illnesses caused by enteric pathogens that were reportable in Minnesota during 2001-2010 revealed that 3.7% of patients with sporadic, domestically acquired enteric infections had reported raw milk consumption during their exposure period. Children were disproportionately affected, and 76% of those <5 years of age were served raw milk from their own or a relative's farm. Severe illness was noted, including hemolytic uremic syndrome among 21% of Escherichia coli O157-infected patients reporting raw milk consumption, and 1 death was reported. Raw milk consumers, potential consumers, and policy makers who might consider relaxing regulations regarding raw milk sales should be educated regarding illnesses associated with raw milk consumption.
Consumption of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products by pregnant women and children.
Committee on Infectious Diseases; Committee on Nutrition; American Academy of Pediatrics.
Abstract
Sales of raw or unpasteurized milk and milk products are still legal in at least 30 states in the United States. Raw milk and milk products from cows, goats, and sheep continue to be a source of bacterial infections attributable to a number of virulent pathogens, including Listeria monocytogenes, Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella species, Brucella species, and Escherichia coli O157. These infections can occur in both healthy and immunocompromised individuals, including older adults, infants, young children, and pregnant women and their unborn fetuses, in whom life-threatening infections and fetal miscarriage can occur. Efforts to limit the sale of raw milk products have met with opposition from those who are proponents of the purported health benefits of consuming raw milk products, which contain natural or unprocessed factors not inactivated by pasteurization. However, the benefits of these natural factors have not been clearly demonstrated in evidence-based studies and, therefore, do not outweigh the risks of raw milk consumption. Substantial data suggest that pasteurized milk confers equivalent health benefits compared with raw milk, without the additional risk of bacterial infections. The purpose of this policy statement was to review the risks of raw milk consumption in the United States and to provide evidence of the risks of infectious complications associated with consumption of unpasteurized milk and milk products, especially among pregnant women, infants, and children.
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Jan 1;48(1):93-100.
Food safety: unpasteurized milk: a continued public health threat.
Lejeune JT1, Rajala-Schultz PJ.
Abstract
Although milk and dairy products are important components of a healthy diet, if consumed unpasteurized, they also can present a health hazard due to possible contamination with pathogenic bacteria. These bacteria can originate even from clinically healthy animals from which milk is derived or from environmental contamination occurring during collection and storage of milk. The decreased frequency of bovine carriage of certain zoonotic pathogens and improved milking hygiene have contributed considerably to decreased contamination of milk but have not, and cannot, fully eliminate the risk of milkborne disease. Pasteurization is the most effective method of enhancing the microbiological safety of milk. The consumption of milk that is not pasteurized increases the risk of contracting disease from a foodstuff that is otherwise very nutritious and healthy. Despite concerns to the contrary, pasteurization does not change the nutritional value of milk. Understanding the science behind this controversial and highly debated topic will provide public health care workers the information needed to discern fact from fiction and will provide a tool to enhance communication with clients in an effort to reduce the incidence of infections associated with the consumption of unpasteurized milk and dairy products.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2014 Jan;20(1):38-44.
Raw milk consumption among patients with non-outbreak-related enteric infections, Minnesota, USA, 2001-2010.
Robinson TJ, Scheftel JM, Smith KE.
Abstract
Raw milk has frequently been identified as the source of foodborne illness outbreaks; however, the number of illnesses ascertained as part of documented outbreaks likely represents a small proportion of the actual number of illnesses associated with this food product. Analysis of routine surveillance data involving illnesses caused by enteric pathogens that were reportable in Minnesota during 2001-2010 revealed that 3.7% of patients with sporadic, domestically acquired enteric infections had reported raw milk consumption during their exposure period. Children were disproportionately affected, and 76% of those <5 years of age were served raw milk from their own or a relative's farm. Severe illness was noted, including hemolytic uremic syndrome among 21% of Escherichia coli O157-infected patients reporting raw milk consumption, and 1 death was reported. Raw milk consumers, potential consumers, and policy makers who might consider relaxing regulations regarding raw milk sales should be educated regarding illnesses associated with raw milk consumption.
I will have to remember this for future reference
3.7% seems pretty insignificant when making a sweeping statement.
actualy it isnt at all. Now if it sets for a while then yea its thicker due to the butter fat rising to the top. The reason the milk at the store dosnt do this is because its been pastorized and homogenized thus breaking down the butter fat and solids better blending them into the skim
3.7% was only the percentage of people who had acquired enteric pathogens that reported drinking raw milk. That's out of all the cases of enteric infections that were acquired from eating contaminated food. When looking at that number, keep in mind how common food poisoning is.
When I was growing up, our neighbors had a dairy farm and we always drank raw milk. Never had a problem, in fact, I don't think I ever had pasteurized/homogenized milk unti I was 18. Ever now and again, I'll get some, but it is a bit rich in taste and a little goes along way with me.
@brutus79 You posting pics or what my man!?!
FuriousWO
New Member
This is an interesting article by John Meadows, it covers grass fed beef and Omega-3 eggs and why he thinks they are better
http://articles.elitefts.com/nutrit...-healthier-way-to-get-leanadd-muscle-or-both/
http://articles.elitefts.com/nutrit...-healthier-way-to-get-leanadd-muscle-or-both/
HuckingFuge
New Member
I would heat treat the raw milk if it was me.
Thats the article that got me started... cbs has me paranoid about milk but the grass fed free range shit sounds like a win win
HuckingFuge
New Member
the grass feed beef is a win win if they are not trying to steal you blind with the price. you can heat treat the milk and be fine. maybe than milk isn't raw no more, I don't know.
Not to put a wrinkle in grass feed/free range beef, but labeled as such doesn't mean herbicides and pesticides were not used to treat the grasses they fed on. I am an advocate of grass fed beef, but I accept the fact many ranchers have to resort to certain chemicals on their grasses in order to finish out their beef profitably.
Brutus - as I am sure you probably already know, you can find people in favor and people opposed to raw milk as you research. About 5 years ago I did a ton of research on it and came to the conclusion that I just couldn't risk the "worst case scenario" - that being illness and infection.
If I were a single dude I would have been more likely to go for it. I even had a local farmer that sold raw milk. But with kids to look after, and my fear that somehow they might get sick, I just couldn't pull the trigger.
Just my conclusion, just my opinion.
jymis
New Member
This is a valid concern. Brutus can always buy raw for himself and use "regular" for his family. It still amazes me how this log is more about all the other aspects of training vs just your cycle. Such great stuff in here.
