It’s been two days since Lykke posed that intriguing question following my previous post: “If one of you drank raw milk from a rabid cow, would you opt for the treatment?”
I’ve been trying to draw some conclusions from the many answers, and am having difficulty. More contradictions and confusion than I would have expected. I would have thought Lykke, of all people, would opt for the treatment, but Lykke eventually says no treatment. No proven human cases from raw milk is convincing enough.
Amanda Rose says she wouldn’t drink the milk with rabies. Dave Milano says he wouldn’t want milk from a rabies-vaccinated cow.
Lykke suggests that, in the end, fear trumps all. “In the past though, most people in the U.S. that drank raw milk from a rabid cow have chosen – of their own free will – to undergo the treatment, which is a series of 6 shots spread over 1 month on precise days to be effective. No one will ever know if they would have developed rabies had they decided to pass on the shots.”
Yet according to that FDA slide information on rabies in raw milk, some “10,000 consumers (were) potentially exposed” to rabies in raw milk in Oklahoma in 2005; “Following the issuance of a state public health alert, more than 500 people called the state hot line and local county health department…”
Eventually, 62 received rabies shots. Doing some simple math, it seems that 9,938 consumers (10,000 minus 62) decided against receiving shots. (Just to make the whole thing more confusing, there is a report on this Oklahoma incident from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, which says nothing about 10,000 people being exposed, and says the milk had “a low level of contamination with rabies virus.”)
Maybe these Oklahoma consumers already had the situation accurately sized up—that there is so much we can’t believe, from the nation’s highest food authority, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as well as from local health authorities…whether it is about the danger of rabies from raw milk, or endless sorts of other dangers.
They tell us that drinking raw dairy is “playing Russian roulette with your health,” yet millions of Americans are doing it, and no one is dropping dead.
But in posing the question, Lykke raises another unspoken point. Most people in the U.S. don’t really have the choice. Because the public health establishment has ruled: when in doubt, ban it. So many people not only don’t have a choice about whether to consume rabies-tainted raw milk, they don’t have the option to consume any raw milk.
As a number of readers suggest, the authorities are much less informed than they want us to think about all manner of public health problems. Hugh Betcha captures the craziness with his imaginary gene-splicing story, and desire “to sell rabies immune fly repellent chocolate milk at the farmers market for $6 a gallon…”
At the heart of these problems is the matter of fear, and the preference of regulators to rely on fear rather than informing us. President Obama stated it well today in a speech:
“I…believe that all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight; that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.”
He was explaining why the Bush administration decided to imprison suspected terrorists at Guantanamo, but he might just as well have been explaining why raw milk is banned in many parts of the country, and why our rights to consume the foods we want are being steadily eroded.
http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/155570181.html
http://www.cdc.gov/RABIES/news/2005-12-03_oklahoma.html
Hugh Betcha’s spliced cow was quite funny – indeed, it might inspire the so-called best and the brightest minds to start some research and development to create and market such a cow…anyone who discovers how to effectively control flies deserves the Nobel Prize (and a place on the ‘richest people in the world" list).
http://www.jsonline.com/business/45806367.html
Chocolate Milk Tax Proposal is Last Straw for Dairy Farmers
Funny, not really there just to much of a ring of truth to the state of whats happening down on our farms!
If I recall correctly, those cows that were filmed at the slaughterhouse exhibited neurological symptoms and the inspectors "alllowed" them to enter the food chain. I would bet it occurs more than people know.
It is amazing that so many "trust" tptb….They certainly are not looking out for the public.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/31/local/me-humane31
http://cbs5.com/local/slaughterhouse.abuse.lawsuit.2.999664.html
http://www.kirotv.com/news/1868748/detail.html <~~from 2002 and it’s still happening
http://www.nodowners.org/usda.htm
"A study of USDA slaughterhouse records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act shows that the Agency approves meat from animals with pneumonia, hepatitis, lymphoma, gangrene and other ailments. Click here for report. "
THE GREATEST NUTRITION RESEARCHER OF THE 20th CENTURY plus 6.5 minute video
THE PRICE POTTENGER STORY
A must see video for the new folks here and a great refresher for us OLD timers.
And let the anti-raw dairy mob weep better yet give up you lost the war!
DEATH of Cleveland Girl Linked to Recalled Beef
Where are the guns and badges now? Perhaps out looking for the real criminals the small raw dairy family farmer?
THIS LITTLE GIRL WAS ONLY 7 YEARS OLD!!!
I am sure that Marler is chomping at the bit already….thanks again factory farms!!
What is even more tragic is the lack if media coverage about how the ecoli 0157H7 come to be deadly and why her little body did not have an immune system worthy of resisting the pathogen.
If she drank raw milk regularly and was accustomed to coliforms and lesser forms of ecoli the odds perhaps would have changed completely in her favor.
A great article was posted in the SF Medical Society Publication recently…see the post.
http://www.sfms.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Article_Archives&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=2588&SECTION=Article_Archives.com
Bacteria were here 2 billion years before us and as things are going will be our demise and they will feast on us when we are gone. The humans that survive will be those that made friends with bacteria and stopped killing them. Perhaps there is a political truism here that applies to terrorists as well. Are we not creating our own worst enemies in the world by not embracing diversity?? We need to be the probiotic and stop dropping Purell bombs on the world ( militarily and environmentally ). When Americas military does well in the world ( like during the Tsunami relief ) people love us but when we kill others in hopes of controlling pathogenic people…they join the dark side and morph and resist all attempts to be calmed and grow like crazy…human pathogens feed on negative assaults, just like bacteria.
So…Drink your raw milk with its complement of environmental immunity building bacteria in it.
This is another reason why AB 1735 was bad for CA raw milk….our retail CDFA authorized raw milk may be too clean ( thankfully we do not pass every test ) . Maybe our next step is to provide a vial of good organic soil with each bottle of raw milk so it can be added back in by the consumer.
Mark
$1 billion amazing.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=7654855&page=1
If it were raw milk, it’d be constantly splashed all over the media.
In regards to the SAD, it seems people appear to believe what the media hype tells them. They don’t read the ingredients nor do they look up what the ingredients are. It says "healthy" on the package so it must be so. The term Sheeple fits. It is sad in more ways than one.
"The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has just issued a call for an immediate moratorium on Genetically Manipulated (GMO) Foods."
Wonder if this will make a dent in the toxins that are pushed on people?
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/hscout/2009/05/19/hscout627168.html
"Children — including children who had asthma — who received the annual inactivated flu vaccine were almost three times more likely to be hospitalized than those who were not inoculated."
These were "laboratory-confirmed influenza" patients, the flu shot didn’t boost thier immune system or prevent the flu.
Survey Probes Raw Milk Attitudes
by a journalist?
"Raw milk seems to be a growing FAD" Yea but ony in this illuminated modern corporate conrolled age that began about 100 years ago. She just discounted thousands of years of history. And I bet that the only thing she knows about curdes and whey is from the first grade nursey rhyme about Little Miss Muffet.
The Alexandre dairy was able to side step regulations through cow leasing. HMMM I would think this would surely bias the mind of an uninformed public.
"I think they are trying to get a little idea of the psyche of people who would put themselves in the position of drinking raw milk when there are obvious dangers" And how do "they" spell HAMBURG that is manufactured by the BigAg Industrial Complex?
"In particular, researchers want to interview residents who were involved in Alexandre Family EcoDairy Farms cow-share program that was the vehicle for distributing unpasteurized milk to its customers. "
Cow share? Then it would be "owners" not customers.
"The letter sent to former cow-share members states that the county health department is working with the state to conduct this research. But local health officials have said they havent had any involvement."
Misleading (lies) within the letter…
"Even though she participated in the survey, Valley said she didnt really trust that it was objective, saying it seemed like the interviewers had their own agendas and were trying to get their own answers.
They just want to tell you a list of all the things that could be a problem with raw milk, and asked if I would still drink it, she said. I told them, Yes I would.
Key words; had their own agendas and were trying to get their own answers.