"Ranée at Arabian Knits" wrote:
>
> In article . com>,
> "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > "Ranée at Arabian Knits" wrote:
> > >
> > > In article
> > > >,
> > > Nancy2 > wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's probably not pasteurized, is it? It's kind of "big brother" to
> > > > refuse to sell it, but I think there are warnings about pregnant women
> > > > and non-pasteurized products.
> > >
> > > And yet, nearly all illnesses and deaths from dairy in the US have
> > > been linked to factories which use pasteurized milk.
> >
> > Which as you are well aware, is an absolutely meaningless thing to say
> > since in the US there are no factories that use unpasteurized milk, and
> > probably 0.1% of the population consumes unpasteurized milk.
>
> It is still legal to buy pasteurized milk and dairy products in many
> states. They just make it harder. You are right that most people don't
> use them. However, it isn't as though pasteurization magically protects
> people. Healthy animals, clean operations and sanitary milking
> practices protect people. Most of the contamination in milk products
> happens post-pasteurization, it wouldn't matter either way in those
> cases. Since milk is pasteurized, for the most part, it has led to
> sloppy pre-pasteurization practices and pasteurization doesn't eliminate
> all bacteria and contaminates. Mixing all the milk in one vat, so that
> milk from sick animals is comingled with milk from healthy animals is
> also a problem that is allowed because of pasteurization.

Claiming that "nearly all illnesses and deaths from dairy in the US have
been linked to factories which use pasteurized milk" attempts to
demonize the factories and/or pasteurized milk and implies that
unpasteurized milk is safer, which is simply not true.

Statistically, since like 0.l% of the population consumes unpasteurized
milk products vs. the 99.8% that consume pasteurized milk products, you
would expect that most issues would relate to the prevalent product.