zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. belorn+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-01-14 13:24:27
A side note, but I had no idea raw milk was a right political signaling in the US. Coming from a Swedish perspective, raw milk is a question about how tight the health control is in the dairy industry. I have always find it an "interesting" approach that in Sweden we have a very much scorched earth approach to dealing with any case where farm animals has any human-transmittable problems. If a test fail you kill all the cows in that farm, possible his neighbors farm stock too if they are too close, and the farmers get "just enough" money to restart the farm. Raw milk does still carry a bit higher risk for young children, women during pregnancy, and the elderly, so there is a recommendation against drinking it for those groups. Sellers also need to register in a special registry if they sell raw milk, and they get extra attention from inspectors.

For those not in the high risk groups, it just an choice based on personal taste. It seems a bit funny that the reason why it is allowed to be sold is directly related to the heavy regulation that enforces such high amount of testing (and strict consequences), so that the product is generally safe regardless of added pasteurization.

replies(1): >>rbanff+H8
2. rbanff+H8[view] [source] 2025-01-14 14:11:29
>>belorn+(OP)
> A side note, but I had no idea raw milk was a right political signaling in the US

Remember a lot of people who are “proudly white” always mention lactose tolerance. They also carry tiki torches.

replies(1): >>belorn+Xo3
◧◩
3. belorn+Xo3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-15 11:59:20
>>rbanff+H8
I looked into the studies regarding the health benefits and the consensus I found was a big amount of shrug. It is true that heating the milk do break down nutrients and enzymes, but the significance of it from pasteurization is an decrease in the realm of 7-10%. The kind of feed the cow eats has a much bigger significance, so comparing raw milk with pasteurized milk is comparing a small number that is hidden in a large number of noisy data.

In term of lactose tolerance, the consensus seems to be that raw milk is slight worse for people with that problem, but again only with a very small margin. It is most likely related to that 7-10% number above.

replies(1): >>rbanff+FP7
◧◩◪
4. rbanff+FP7[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-01-16 15:55:01
>>belorn+Xo3
The point I was making was that proudly racist people who thinks caucasians are superior to other ethnic groups drank milk because lactose intolerance is less prevalent in their groups.
[go to top]