On 6/7/2012 6:34 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 7:11 PM, A Moose in Love wrote:
>> I understand that raw milk has a higher probability of containing
>> pathogens than pasteurized milk.
>> Can the raw milk not be tested for these pathogens?
>
> I don't know why that should be hard to believe. Pasteurization is a
> process that is used to destroy naturally occurring pathogens in milk.
> It was first used to kill harmful pathogens like Campylobacter jejuni,
> E. coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella.Pasteurization
> is effective in destroying the bacteria in milk that cause tuberculosis,
> salmonellosis, diphtheria, typhoid fever, and other illnesses without
> adversely affecting the milk's nutritional content, flavor or quality.
>
> http://www.ext.colostate.edu/safefoo.../v10n2s04.html

There's only one serious reason for objecting to pasteurization of milk;
raw milk is supposed to taste better. It's certainly no better for you
and I don't like the taste of milk much anyway!

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not" in Reply To.