8 ms·

Raw milk sales spike despite CDC's warnings of risk

23 points by geox 2y ago

h2odragon 2y ago
I know people who have advocated raw milk since the 70s. Very progressive folks. They're pissed to have become "right wing" without having changed any opinions. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/10/the-alt-right-rebrand-of-raw-milk-00145625 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/10/the-alt-ri...
- tremon 2y ago
  Ah, the joys of living in a society incapable of nuance.
- blindriver 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - krapp 2y ago
    It wasn't a pivot. Anti-vax belief was never as mainstream a position amongst the left as it is now among the right, it was generally condemned as new-age nonsense, particularly where the "vaccines cause autism" crowd was concerned. The left has always been the pro-science, pro-government side in general, which is why the right condemns them as "godless atheists" and "communists," because the right tends to put more weight on religion, spirituality and suspicion of secular power as part of its narrative of preserving traditional (read:religious) morality against a conspiracy of evil seeking to undermine them. People (not all of whom were leftist) followed pandemic protocols because most people are not conspiracy theorists and they considered doing so to be perfectly reasonable in the context of a pandemic. For most people, there was no political angle to wearing masks, social distancing, quarantines or what have you, it was just the Trumpists who made it so.
    - rvnx 2y ago
      It's a bit wild to claim that the vaccines are perfectly safe and that we are certain of it. The truth is probably in-between, neither really safe, neither really unsafe. The vaccines are okay-ish, they have some use, and work against a disease that originally was very violent (and by natural selection and mutations got weaker and weaker), but now with all the mutations that the virus has gone through, not sure it's really good or really effective at all (unless you meet the virus from 5 years ago). Regarding science: The leftists are usually against governments (e.g. anarchism, communism), and for the people to decide, and to promote "woke" values. The pro-governments and rules is more of a rightist trait (supporting police, border control, etc), and to promote "traditional" values.
      - maxerickson 2y ago
        Covid hasn't particularly gotten weaker, there's just roughly zero people left that don't have some baseline immunity, either from vaccination or infection.
    - blindriver 2y ago
      You really shouldn’t talk about things you don’t know or didn’t live through. The government was the one trying to crack down on free speech, banning rap music and other things that gave alternative views. The government was the one that wasn’t allowing gays to marry. The government was the one sending troops to wars that no one cared about. The government was the one who created the Patriot act to strip people of their rights. The government was the one enriching Wall Street, protecting Big Pharma and letting police run around beating Rodney Kings all the time. The government was not to be trusted at all. This was what life was like for liberals in the 80s, 90s and even early 00s. The idea that the left was supporting government shows you know nothing about how life was like even 20 years ago. Rage Against the Machine famously protested the DNC because both parties suck. Nowadays if you don’t support the government or believe the CDC or FDA, or if you don’t want to support the proxy war in Ukraine, you’re somehow a MAGA alt right white nationalist. They have really done a number on the entire country.
      - 2y ago
  - tombert 2y ago
    It's actually kind of a myth that progressives used to be the primary "anti vax" crowd [1]. I definitely did meet progressives who thought vaccines were dangerous, but I met many more conservatives that were "skeptical" of vaccines way before COVID. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/01/conservatives-are-more-likely-to-believe-that-vaccines-cause-autism/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/0...
    - blindriver 2y ago
      It’s not a myth at all. All the granola progressive lefts were all primarily anti-vax and most moderate to progressive lefts were definitely anti-big pharma and anti-military industrial complex. I know because I lived long enough to be friends with them and live among them and am left myself, at least a 90s left wing liberal that was fervently anti-government and anti-war and anti-pharma.
      - tombert 2y ago
        Nope, sorry, personal anecdotes are not evidence no matter how many times you repeat them across multiple threads (also what does being anti-military-industrial-complex have to do with being anti-vax)? The data seems to indicate you are just wrong. Sorry.
        blindriver 2y ago
        Good thing you’re not the authority on that.
        tombert 2y ago
        I'm not 100% sure why your anecdata is somehow more valid than mine? Anyone on the internet can claim anything, it's ridiculous if you think that you just asserting that something is true because of your personal vibes is convincing to anyone. At least I provided a source. You provided literally nothing.
        linearrust 2y ago
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    I wouldn’t ascribe your views on these topics to being “a traditional liberal.” These seem unrelated at best to traditional liberalism.
    - blindriver 2y ago
      Good thing you’re not the authority on that.
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        “For an HN user like myself, the sky is yellow and fish control the airwaves”
  - macintux 2y ago
    > ...supporting forever wars like Ukraine Opposing Russian aggression, rape, and slaughter in Europe is now a left-wing thing? Trump broke one political party psychologically, but it isn't the left-wing one.
throw383y8 2y ago
They could provide simple PCR tests to detect bird flu virus in milk. We produced trillions of those very recently. Those "warnings" are useless.
- Zak 2y ago
  A PCR test requires specialized equipment and trained personnel; it is typically conducted in a laboratory setting.
  - throw383y8 2y ago
    And CDC has equipment and personnel. They should provide free anonymous testing, like with STDs. I want to know I am safe, without risking my pet cows life!
lettergram 2y ago
I’ve been drinking raw milk for years. Amish all drink raw milk, as do most of the folks around me. Tastes better, naturally has lactase so lactose intolerant folks can drink it, etc None of us believe anything the cdc says because they have always said “don’t drink raw milk” and all of the Amish and others are the healthiest people you’ll ever meet
- lencastre 2y ago
  Oh brother… eyes roll so much, can see brain
- tombert 2y ago
  > None of us believe anything the cdc says because they have always said “don’t drink raw milk” and all of the Amish and others are the healthiest people you’ll ever meet I don't think that logic makes any sense. The "ones you meet" are the ones who didn't die. You're not meeting the dead ones. Selection bias and such. If you have statistics that Amish people have fewer deaths or something, that would be better evidence.
  - briantakita 2y ago
    > The "ones you meet" are the ones who didn't die Can you link to any instances of an outbreak of disease from unpasturized milk among the Amish people? Or even among the general population? All I know about is one time over 150 years ago the milk got spoiled on a train in Chicago. Which is why we have pasturization. I found this study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140832/, which seems to indicate that raw milk consumption has benefits.
    - tombert 2y ago
      I didn't look because a claim without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. What the parent comment claimed didn't logically follow and I was pointing that out. Your link does seem to indicate potential benefits, so I might give it a read, but I really don't want to get tuberculosis so I probably won't drink raw milk regardless. EDIT: before you accuse me of hypocrisy, I did post a link talking about bovine TB elsewhere in a sister thread.
lumb63 2y ago
Almost as if people are skeptical of/apathetic to guidance from an organization that recently got done eroding decades of public trust.
tombert 2y ago
Isn't there also a real risk of catching tuberculosis via raw milk consumption as well? [1]. I know there are advocates of raw milk, and I have heard it tastes better than the stuff you get at the grocery store, but it always seemed like the real risks of getting an infections outweighed the benefits. This stuff isn't meant for humans, it's meant for baby cows, I don't know why people think that you can just drink it untreated without any risks. [1] https://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/FastFacts/pdfs/bovine_tuberculosis_F.pdf https://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/FastFacts/pdfs/bovine_tubercul...
- blindriver 2y ago
  I’m not a raw milk advocate but saying “milk isn’t meant for humans” is ridiculous. If we can digest it, it’s for us. Is cow meat meant for us, or only for wolves and bears? What does it even mean for something to be “meant for us”? Are you saying that God didn’t mean for us to drink cow’s milk? Should we all live off women’s breast milk for our entire lives because that’s what is “meant for us”?
  - bavent 2y ago
    A lot of people actually can’t digest it. Lactose intolerance.
    - janice1999 2y ago
      Humans were drinking animal milk long before Europeans developed the mutation to fully digest it. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/famine-and-diseases-likely-drove-europeans-ability-to-digest-milk-180980483/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/famine-and-dis...
    - blindriver 2y ago
      Not raw milk.
      - janice1999 2y ago
        Unpasturised milk does not contain (sufficient) lactase needed to break down lactose. You are welcome to cite any credible research that says otherwise. https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/raw-milk-claim-is-udderly-untrue/ https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/raw-milk-claim-is-udderly-u...
unethical_ban 2y ago
I hope the CDC issues new warnings about the dangers of chicken tartare and pufferfish meat.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
whatshisface 2y ago
Forcing people to take good advice makes you the bad guy. The same is true in government. People getting sick from raw milk might actually rebuild the cultural reputation of food safety institutions; if they crack down average people will continue trusting them less and less.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Like driving on the right side of the road? Stopping at red lights?
  - whatshisface 2y ago
    I think the constant exposure to traffic at wreck-jammed intersections reinforces a respect for the existence of traffic laws that doesn't exist for good regulations that aren't violated as often. Also, many people absolutely do see traffic cops as the bad guys.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Yeah, you’re just explaining a textbook confusion of cause and effect: “milk is generally safe, therefore we don’t need these pesky regulations!” We know what life looks like without these regulations. Answer: Lots of safety problems. If these people didn’t produce risk of contagious pathogens I’d not really have a problem with their own decisions, but since they do produce that risk, the right way to prove these regulations unnecessary is to conduct scientific experiments and prove the regulations unnecessary. It was real world experience and scientific experiments that got them put in place to begin with.
      - whatshisface 2y ago
        Maybe people would find it less onerous to require testing. Technology for that stuff has advanced a lot since raw milk was originally banned on epidemiological grounds.
cafemachiavelli 2y ago
Don't think I'd want to take that risk regularly, although I did try raw milk a few years back and definitely preferred the taste to my standard supermarket brand milk at the time. After a bit of experimentation I noticed that I dislike some kind of flavor that is present in the homogenized milks I tasted but not the unhomogenized milk from my local farmers's market. Luckily, pasteurization does not worsen the taste profile for me, so now I get the best of both worlds at a slightly higher cost.
snapplebobapple 2y ago
Its weird that america cares about this so much when healthcare is primarily private so the externalities of this choice can be priced via insurance premiums. Makes more sense to me for places eith primarily socialized medicine to care more and yet they have this largely legal and largely don't have problems as well. in short the guys that really care about this have less justification for that care (and ensueing interference) and the guys that dont care that much have larger reasons to potentially care but at the same time dont seem to be exhibitibg the large problems claimed to justify intervention.
- tombert 2y ago
  To be clear, I would much rather have socialized healthcare, but just to rebut your point a bit here. > Its weird that america cares about this so much when healthcare is primarily private so the externalities of this choice can be priced via insurance premiums. Makes more sense to me for places eith primarily socialized medicine to care more and yet they have this largely legal and largely don't have problems as well. Medical insurance is more or a less a collectivist thing, even in the US, and most people aren't directly buying their own insurance, they get a flat rate from their employer. If there is a considerable increase of diseases and hospitalization, insurance companies will end up raising their rates for everyone, including those who didn't do the stuff that increased the hospitalizations. Also, if there's a risk of the person drinking raw milk incubating a disease that can eventually spread to other humans, then it's absurd to pretend that it doesn't affect us. If you catch tuberculosis from raw milk, and then spread that to someone else, that's obviously bad for literally every other human on earth, or at least every other human who is susceptible to TB.
  - snapplebobapple 2y ago
    You claimed American healthcare is large collectivist when the point was it was much less socialized/collectivist than other places that don't seem to care about raw milk being legal and also don't seem to have an appreciable health problem from raw milk being legal. I wouldn't really call that a rebut, I would call that missing the point. Also, that there is a risk to others in it self is not a per se reason for illegality (or else everything would be illegal). What matters is the cost of the risk not borne by the person making the choice vs the net benefit directly to the person taking the risk. Based on the fact that raw milk is legal in much of the world with very rare ill effects (and even rarer ill effects beyond the person consuming the raw milk product) your last two paragraphs ring very hollow
perihelions 2y ago
Here's a topical anecdote. There's a dairy farm in Texas which had free-roaming farm cats, around 24 of them, who were given raw milk to lap by the workers. H5N1 killed 50% of them in days. - "The cats were found dead with no apparent signs of injury and were from a resident population of ≈24 domestic cats that had been fed milk from sick cows. Clinical disease in cows on that farm was first noted on March 16; the cats became sick on March 17, and several cats died in a cluster during March 19–20. In total, >50% of the cats at that dairy became ill and died." https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/7/24-0508_article https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/7/24-0508_article https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cats-died-after-drinking-milk-bird-flu-infected-cows/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cats-died-after-drinking-milk-b...
- ryandrake 2y ago
  The conspiracy theorists are already working on making H5N1 their next act of performative contrariness. Anything having to do with the disease is going to become a lighting rod. Go read some conservative forums, they're already anticipating public health guidance, and preparing their tough-guy "I will not comply" pitchforks. You can bet anything the CDC says about anything, they're going to be against--because their entire schtick is to be against the health system.
  - iJohnDoe 2y ago
    > because their entire schtick is to be against the health system. Until they get sick. Then they are begging for help.
    - ryandrake 2y ago
      r/HermanCainAward recipients. Person X: "COVID is a hoax! It's a PLANdemic!" Person X: "Fight the power! Don't wear a mask! Bodily autonomy!" Person X: "It's only a cold! The vaccine is big government poison!" Person X's daughter: "Asking for kind words for my dad. He was admitted into the ICU this afternoon with severe COVID pneumonia. This is so shocking. We don't know how this could have been prevented. Only God can save him so please pray!!!"
xnx 2y ago
Like vaccines, many on the right think pasteurization is woke: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/business/raw-milk-bird-flu-infowars-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/business/raw-milk-bird-fl...
yalogin 2y ago
A large percentage of the population is doing the exact opposite of what good science is telling them. I feel like it's not just the economy but general critical thinking and education of folks has split into a K curve.
johnea 2y ago
> raw milk products account for a small fraction of overall dairy sales Given this quote from the article, the title seems hyperbolic.

23 points by geox 2y ago

I know people who have advocated raw milk since the 70s. Very progressive folks. They're pissed to have become "right wing" without having changed any opinions. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/10/the-alt-right-rebrand-of-raw-milk-00145625 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/10/the-alt-ri...

tremon 2y ago
Ah, the joys of living in a society incapable of nuance.
blindriver 2y ago
[flagged]
- krapp 2y ago
  It wasn't a pivot. Anti-vax belief was never as mainstream a position amongst the left as it is now among the right, it was generally condemned as new-age nonsense, particularly where the "vaccines cause autism" crowd was concerned. The left has always been the pro-science, pro-government side in general, which is why the right condemns them as "godless atheists" and "communists," because the right tends to put more weight on religion, spirituality and suspicion of secular power as part of its narrative of preserving traditional (read:religious) morality against a conspiracy of evil seeking to undermine them. People (not all of whom were leftist) followed pandemic protocols because most people are not conspiracy theorists and they considered doing so to be perfectly reasonable in the context of a pandemic. For most people, there was no political angle to wearing masks, social distancing, quarantines or what have you, it was just the Trumpists who made it so.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    It's a bit wild to claim that the vaccines are perfectly safe and that we are certain of it. The truth is probably in-between, neither really safe, neither really unsafe. The vaccines are okay-ish, they have some use, and work against a disease that originally was very violent (and by natural selection and mutations got weaker and weaker), but now with all the mutations that the virus has gone through, not sure it's really good or really effective at all (unless you meet the virus from 5 years ago). Regarding science: The leftists are usually against governments (e.g. anarchism, communism), and for the people to decide, and to promote "woke" values. The pro-governments and rules is more of a rightist trait (supporting police, border control, etc), and to promote "traditional" values.
    - maxerickson 2y ago
      Covid hasn't particularly gotten weaker, there's just roughly zero people left that don't have some baseline immunity, either from vaccination or infection.
  - blindriver 2y ago
    You really shouldn’t talk about things you don’t know or didn’t live through. The government was the one trying to crack down on free speech, banning rap music and other things that gave alternative views. The government was the one that wasn’t allowing gays to marry. The government was the one sending troops to wars that no one cared about. The government was the one who created the Patriot act to strip people of their rights. The government was the one enriching Wall Street, protecting Big Pharma and letting police run around beating Rodney Kings all the time. The government was not to be trusted at all. This was what life was like for liberals in the 80s, 90s and even early 00s. The idea that the left was supporting government shows you know nothing about how life was like even 20 years ago. Rage Against the Machine famously protested the DNC because both parties suck. Nowadays if you don’t support the government or believe the CDC or FDA, or if you don’t want to support the proxy war in Ukraine, you’re somehow a MAGA alt right white nationalist. They have really done a number on the entire country.
    - 2y ago
- tombert 2y ago
  It's actually kind of a myth that progressives used to be the primary "anti vax" crowd [1]. I definitely did meet progressives who thought vaccines were dangerous, but I met many more conservatives that were "skeptical" of vaccines way before COVID. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/01/conservatives-are-more-likely-to-believe-that-vaccines-cause-autism/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/03/0...
  - blindriver 2y ago
    It’s not a myth at all. All the granola progressive lefts were all primarily anti-vax and most moderate to progressive lefts were definitely anti-big pharma and anti-military industrial complex. I know because I lived long enough to be friends with them and live among them and am left myself, at least a 90s left wing liberal that was fervently anti-government and anti-war and anti-pharma.
    - tombert 2y ago
      Nope, sorry, personal anecdotes are not evidence no matter how many times you repeat them across multiple threads (also what does being anti-military-industrial-complex have to do with being anti-vax)? The data seems to indicate you are just wrong. Sorry.
      - blindriver 2y ago
        Good thing you’re not the authority on that.
        tombert 2y ago
        I'm not 100% sure why your anecdata is somehow more valid than mine? Anyone on the internet can claim anything, it's ridiculous if you think that you just asserting that something is true because of your personal vibes is convincing to anyone. At least I provided a source. You provided literally nothing.
      - linearrust 2y ago
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  I wouldn’t ascribe your views on these topics to being “a traditional liberal.” These seem unrelated at best to traditional liberalism.
  - blindriver 2y ago
    Good thing you’re not the authority on that.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      “For an HN user like myself, the sky is yellow and fish control the airwaves”
- macintux 2y ago
  > ...supporting forever wars like Ukraine Opposing Russian aggression, rape, and slaughter in Europe is now a left-wing thing? Trump broke one political party psychologically, but it isn't the left-wing one.

throw383y8 2y ago

They could provide simple PCR tests to detect bird flu virus in milk. We produced trillions of those very recently. Those "warnings" are useless.

Zak 2y ago
A PCR test requires specialized equipment and trained personnel; it is typically conducted in a laboratory setting.
- throw383y8 2y ago
  And CDC has equipment and personnel. They should provide free anonymous testing, like with STDs. I want to know I am safe, without risking my pet cows life!

lettergram 2y ago

I’ve been drinking raw milk for years. Amish all drink raw milk, as do most of the folks around me. Tastes better, naturally has lactase so lactose intolerant folks can drink it, etc None of us believe anything the cdc says because they have always said “don’t drink raw milk” and all of the Amish and others are the healthiest people you’ll ever meet

lencastre 2y ago
Oh brother… eyes roll so much, can see brain
tombert 2y ago
> None of us believe anything the cdc says because they have always said “don’t drink raw milk” and all of the Amish and others are the healthiest people you’ll ever meet I don't think that logic makes any sense. The "ones you meet" are the ones who didn't die. You're not meeting the dead ones. Selection bias and such. If you have statistics that Amish people have fewer deaths or something, that would be better evidence.
- briantakita 2y ago
  > The "ones you meet" are the ones who didn't die Can you link to any instances of an outbreak of disease from unpasturized milk among the Amish people? Or even among the general population? All I know about is one time over 150 years ago the milk got spoiled on a train in Chicago. Which is why we have pasturization. I found this study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140832/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140832/, which seems to indicate that raw milk consumption has benefits.
  - tombert 2y ago
    I didn't look because a claim without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. What the parent comment claimed didn't logically follow and I was pointing that out. Your link does seem to indicate potential benefits, so I might give it a read, but I really don't want to get tuberculosis so I probably won't drink raw milk regardless. EDIT: before you accuse me of hypocrisy, I did post a link talking about bovine TB elsewhere in a sister thread.

lumb63 2y ago

Almost as if people are skeptical of/apathetic to guidance from an organization that recently got done eroding decades of public trust.

tombert 2y ago

Isn't there also a real risk of catching tuberculosis via raw milk consumption as well? [1]. I know there are advocates of raw milk, and I have heard it tastes better than the stuff you get at the grocery store, but it always seemed like the real risks of getting an infections outweighed the benefits. This stuff isn't meant for humans, it's meant for baby cows, I don't know why people think that you can just drink it untreated without any risks. [1] https://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/FastFacts/pdfs/bovine_tuberculosis_F.pdf https://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/FastFacts/pdfs/bovine_tubercul...

blindriver 2y ago
I’m not a raw milk advocate but saying “milk isn’t meant for humans” is ridiculous. If we can digest it, it’s for us. Is cow meat meant for us, or only for wolves and bears? What does it even mean for something to be “meant for us”? Are you saying that God didn’t mean for us to drink cow’s milk? Should we all live off women’s breast milk for our entire lives because that’s what is “meant for us”?
- bavent 2y ago
  A lot of people actually can’t digest it. Lactose intolerance.
  - janice1999 2y ago
    Humans were drinking animal milk long before Europeans developed the mutation to fully digest it. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/famine-and-diseases-likely-drove-europeans-ability-to-digest-milk-180980483/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/famine-and-dis...
  - blindriver 2y ago
    Not raw milk.
    - janice1999 2y ago
      Unpasturised milk does not contain (sufficient) lactase needed to break down lactose. You are welcome to cite any credible research that says otherwise. https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/raw-milk-claim-is-udderly-untrue/ https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/raw-milk-claim-is-udderly-u...

unethical_ban 2y ago

I hope the CDC issues new warnings about the dangers of chicken tartare and pufferfish meat.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

whatshisface 2y ago

Forcing people to take good advice makes you the bad guy. The same is true in government. People getting sick from raw milk might actually rebuild the cultural reputation of food safety institutions; if they crack down average people will continue trusting them less and less.

llamaimperative 2y ago
Like driving on the right side of the road? Stopping at red lights?
- whatshisface 2y ago
  I think the constant exposure to traffic at wreck-jammed intersections reinforces a respect for the existence of traffic laws that doesn't exist for good regulations that aren't violated as often. Also, many people absolutely do see traffic cops as the bad guys.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    Yeah, you’re just explaining a textbook confusion of cause and effect: “milk is generally safe, therefore we don’t need these pesky regulations!” We know what life looks like without these regulations. Answer: Lots of safety problems. If these people didn’t produce risk of contagious pathogens I’d not really have a problem with their own decisions, but since they do produce that risk, the right way to prove these regulations unnecessary is to conduct scientific experiments and prove the regulations unnecessary. It was real world experience and scientific experiments that got them put in place to begin with.
    - whatshisface 2y ago
      Maybe people would find it less onerous to require testing. Technology for that stuff has advanced a lot since raw milk was originally banned on epidemiological grounds.

cafemachiavelli 2y ago

Don't think I'd want to take that risk regularly, although I did try raw milk a few years back and definitely preferred the taste to my standard supermarket brand milk at the time. After a bit of experimentation I noticed that I dislike some kind of flavor that is present in the homogenized milks I tasted but not the unhomogenized milk from my local farmers's market. Luckily, pasteurization does not worsen the taste profile for me, so now I get the best of both worlds at a slightly higher cost.

snapplebobapple 2y ago

Its weird that america cares about this so much when healthcare is primarily private so the externalities of this choice can be priced via insurance premiums. Makes more sense to me for places eith primarily socialized medicine to care more and yet they have this largely legal and largely don't have problems as well. in short the guys that really care about this have less justification for that care (and ensueing interference) and the guys that dont care that much have larger reasons to potentially care but at the same time dont seem to be exhibitibg the large problems claimed to justify intervention.

tombert 2y ago
To be clear, I would much rather have socialized healthcare, but just to rebut your point a bit here. > Its weird that america cares about this so much when healthcare is primarily private so the externalities of this choice can be priced via insurance premiums. Makes more sense to me for places eith primarily socialized medicine to care more and yet they have this largely legal and largely don't have problems as well. Medical insurance is more or a less a collectivist thing, even in the US, and most people aren't directly buying their own insurance, they get a flat rate from their employer. If there is a considerable increase of diseases and hospitalization, insurance companies will end up raising their rates for everyone, including those who didn't do the stuff that increased the hospitalizations. Also, if there's a risk of the person drinking raw milk incubating a disease that can eventually spread to other humans, then it's absurd to pretend that it doesn't affect us. If you catch tuberculosis from raw milk, and then spread that to someone else, that's obviously bad for literally every other human on earth, or at least every other human who is susceptible to TB.
- snapplebobapple 2y ago
  You claimed American healthcare is large collectivist when the point was it was much less socialized/collectivist than other places that don't seem to care about raw milk being legal and also don't seem to have an appreciable health problem from raw milk being legal. I wouldn't really call that a rebut, I would call that missing the point. Also, that there is a risk to others in it self is not a per se reason for illegality (or else everything would be illegal). What matters is the cost of the risk not borne by the person making the choice vs the net benefit directly to the person taking the risk. Based on the fact that raw milk is legal in much of the world with very rare ill effects (and even rarer ill effects beyond the person consuming the raw milk product) your last two paragraphs ring very hollow

perihelions 2y ago

Here's a topical anecdote. There's a dairy farm in Texas which had free-roaming farm cats, around 24 of them, who were given raw milk to lap by the workers. H5N1 killed 50% of them in days. - "The cats were found dead with no apparent signs of injury and were from a resident population of ≈24 domestic cats that had been fed milk from sick cows. Clinical disease in cows on that farm was first noted on March 16; the cats became sick on March 17, and several cats died in a cluster during March 19–20. In total, >50% of the cats at that dairy became ill and died." https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/7/24-0508_article https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/7/24-0508_article https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cats-died-after-drinking-milk-bird-flu-infected-cows/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cats-died-after-drinking-milk-b...

ryandrake 2y ago
The conspiracy theorists are already working on making H5N1 their next act of performative contrariness. Anything having to do with the disease is going to become a lighting rod. Go read some conservative forums, they're already anticipating public health guidance, and preparing their tough-guy "I will not comply" pitchforks. You can bet anything the CDC says about anything, they're going to be against--because their entire schtick is to be against the health system.
- iJohnDoe 2y ago
  > because their entire schtick is to be against the health system. Until they get sick. Then they are begging for help.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    r/HermanCainAward recipients. Person X: "COVID is a hoax! It's a PLANdemic!" Person X: "Fight the power! Don't wear a mask! Bodily autonomy!" Person X: "It's only a cold! The vaccine is big government poison!" Person X's daughter: "Asking for kind words for my dad. He was admitted into the ICU this afternoon with severe COVID pneumonia. This is so shocking. We don't know how this could have been prevented. Only God can save him so please pray!!!"

xnx 2y ago

Like vaccines, many on the right think pasteurization is woke: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/business/raw-milk-bird-flu-infowars-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/business/raw-milk-bird-fl...

yalogin 2y ago

A large percentage of the population is doing the exact opposite of what good science is telling them. I feel like it's not just the economy but general critical thinking and education of folks has split into a K curve.

johnea 2y ago

> raw milk products account for a small fraction of overall dairy sales Given this quote from the article, the title seems hyperbolic.