3 ms·

I mean, saying 840x more makes it sound significant, but... US population in 2017 was 324 million. 5% of that is 16 million people. 2645 out of 16 million is 0

I mean, saying 840x more makes it sound significant, but... US population in 2017 was 324 million. 5% of that is 16 million people. 2645 out of 16 million is 0.017%. Does that make it sound significant? Is that even as dangerous as refined sugar? In my mind that's well within the risk range of "slap a warning label on it and let people make their own decisions".

TylerE 2y ago
What's the benefit? It doesn't taste different. It's just a thing that appeals to luddites and granola moms.
- willcipriano 2y ago
  Not everything that happens needs to benefit you.
  - skyyler 2y ago
    They were asking what the benefit was to you, actually.
    - dukeyukey 2y ago
      There is no benefit to me, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.
- eikenberry 2y ago
  The benefit already laid out by the grand-parent post... to grant easy access for people to use it to make their own cheese.
- dukeyukey 2y ago
  We shouldn't just ban everything that has no benefit. People are allowed to make decisions about stuff. If someone wants to drink raw milk, let them.
- kerkeslager 2y ago
  I don't know of any benefits to raw milk, why don't you ask a luddite or a granola mom? I don't consume raw milk products and I'm not trying to sell you on them. The benefit to not regulating irrelevant things like raw milk, is that we can put regulatory funds toward things that kill more then 3 people in 20 years--that's your statistic, I pulled it from your post. How many people die of diabetes caused by added sugars each year, I wonder? To be honest, I don't really care if raw milk remains illegal. My main objection to your post was the manipulation of statistics to make an insignificant issue seem significant.