The claim of a difference between raw milk and pasteurized has been documented by a study published in the Journal of Allergy and Immunology. A full 41% of children who drink raw milk exclusively are protected against asthma. The disease that steals a child’s breath can be prevented by drinking natural raw milk instead of fortified nutrient-destroyed pasteurized milk. Their odds of developing hay fever were approximately halved, and they were 26% less likely to develop sudden allergies.
Governmental agencies aren’t likely to change their push to eliminate all raw milk everywhere, of course. That would conflict with the desires of their masters in Agribusiness: the destruction of all competition, leaving them free to raise sick cattle that produce pus-and-drug-filled pseudo milk, which must be processed with enzyme-destroying pasteurization to keep from killing us outright.
Of course, they’ll lie to us about the dangers. Even the authors of the study went along with the charade. One of them, Hannah Gould, stated, “From CDC’s perspective, raw milk can carry harmful bacteria and other germs that can cause severe illness and even death. While it is possible to get foodborne illnesses from many different foods, raw milk is one of the riskiest of all.”
That is based on nothing. How many of the last 5, 10, 50, 100, or 1000 outbreaks of foodborne illness resulted from raw milk? Quite frankly, finding even one that’s actually been documented as caused by raw milk is difficult to find. The technique used by the FDA is to make the accusation of an outbreak, and then, after they’ve forced the farmers to stop selling it, they quietly drop the issue. Finding actual documentation of an outbreak of foodborne illness caused by raw milk is equivalent to finding hen’s teeth.
Contrast that to the massive outbreak of E. coli in the EU a couple of months ago. It killed dozens, permanently debilitated many others, and infected around 2,000 people. Nonetheless, it’s so important to protect factory farm milk producers from the economic impact of raw milk producers that our government is dedicated to convincing us of its dangers and invests millions of dollars in conducting SWAT-like raids on producers and sellers of raw milk.
The study was careful to assure that the difference in asthma and allergy rates was genuinely associated with drinking raw milk. They even verified that the same milk the children drank raw led to the same rate of asthma when it was boiled.
Factors other than the milk were also eliminated as potential causes of the difference in results between raw and pasteurized milk. There can be little question about the health benefits of raw milk.
One of the most important things not considered by advocates of pasteurization as they propound upon the dubious dangers associated with raw milk are its definitive health benefits. Apparently, stealing the breath of children doesn’t particularly bother them.