Heres another very compelling read with references and research from a well-known MD who aint afraid to speak the truth to back up the superiority of raw milk.
http://www.karlloren.com/aajonus/p15.htm
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT IN FAVOR OF GRADE A RAW MILK
EXPERT REPORT AND RECCOMENDATION
BY
DR. WILLIAM CAMBELL DOUGLASS JR., M.D.
Heres some very intresting excerpts —
) HEALTH RISKS FROM DRINKING PASTEURIZED MILK
a. Bacterial Risks from drinking Pasteurized Milk
In 1945 there were 450 cases of infectious disease attributed to raw milk. There were 1,492 cases attributed to pasteurized milk.[1] There was 1 case of disease for every 12,400,000 quarts of pasteurized milk consumed, and 1 case of disease for every 18,900,000 quarts of raw milk consumed.[2] In other words, a person could drink 6,500,000 more quarts of raw milk than pasteurized without getting sick.
In 1945 there was an epidemic of food-poisoning in Phoenix, Arizona.[3] The official report reads, �??Pasteurization charts…show milk was properly pasteurized and leads to the assumption that toxin was produced in milk while it was stored�?��?? There were 300 sick people from this pasteurized-milk food-poisoning.
Great Bend, Kansas, in 1945, had 468 cases of gastroenteritis from pasteurized milk. This was traced to �??unsanitary conditions in dairies, unsterilized bottles�??. Nine people died.
In October 1978, there was an epidemic of salmonella attributed to food-poisoning by pasteurized milk in Arizona involving 68 people. The bacteria level was 23 times the legal limit. The CDC reported that the milk had been properly pasteurized. Yet the CDC continues to tell us that, �??..only with pasteurization is there. . . assurance�?? against infection.
In June, 1982, 172 people in a three-state area in the Southeast were stricken with an intestinal infection. Over 100 hundred were hospitalized. The infection, which caused severe diarrhea, fever, nausea, abdominal pain, and headache, was caused by pasteurized milk.[4]
In 1983, an outbreak of listeriosis that occurred in Massachusetts 1983, pasteurized whole or 2% milk was implicated as the source of infection. Inspection of the milk-producing plant detected no apparent breach in the pasteurization process.[5]
In August 1984, approximately 200 persons became ill with S. typhimurium from pasteurized milk produced in a plant in Melrose, IL. The regulators kept this outbreak secret. Without evidence they concluded that the milk wasn�??t properly pasteurized. But, again, in November 1984, another outbreak of S. typhimurium occurred in persons consuming pasteurized milk bottled in the same plant. Again, they kept it secret and assumed the milk was not properly pasteurized. Then, in March 1985, there were 16,284 confirmed cases of S. typhimurium resulting from pasteurized milk bottled in the same plant. Tests proved the milk had been properly pasteurized. Investigators with preconceived notions, fueled by the efforts of health departments, came to conclusions without an investigation and had first accused raw milk and the media carried it to the people.[6]
Consumer Reports, January 1974,revealed that out of 125 tested samples of pasteurized milk and milk products, 44% proved in violation of state regulations. Consumer Reports concluded, �??The quality of a number of the dairy products in this study was little short of deplorable.�?? Consumer Reports stated that �??former objections�?? to pasteurized milk are valid today:
a) Pasteurization is an excuse for the sale of dirty milk.
b) Pasteurization may be used to mask low quality milk.
c) Pasteurization promotes carelessness and discourages the effort to produce clean milk.
b. INFANT DEATH SYNDROME, COLIC AND OTHER INFANT DISEASES FROM FEEDING PASTEURIZED MILK
The Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SID), crib death, baffled scientists for years. Apparently healthy babies die in their sleep without crying, without struggling. Infants are six months of age or younger with the highest incidence at about three months. Almost every conceivable cause, from Vitamin C deficiency to suffocation in bedding has been hypothesized as cause. Barrett, in 1954, suggested that inhalation of food while sleeping may be the cause. Barrett and co-workers at the University of Cambridge worked from facts that already proved that most infants fed on pasteurized cow�??s milk had evidence in their blood that they are potentially allergic to cow�??s milk protein. Infants often regurgitate various amounts of milk while asleep that could cause anaphylaxis to a small amount of milk inhaled into the lungs. Subjecting guinea pigs sensitized to milk, they dripped pasteurized milk into the throat and down the windpipe. �??Very soon after introducing the [pasteurized] milk into the larynx of an anesthetized guinea pig, the animal stopped breathing without any sign of struggle.�??
Colic is a concern with infants who are fed pasteurized milk. One out of every five babies suffers from colic. Pediatricians learned long ago that pasteurized cows�?? milk was often the reason. A more recent study also linked pasteurized cow�??s milk consumption to chronic constipation in children.[9] These researchers observed that pasteurized milk consumption resulted in perianal sores and severe pain on defecation, leading to constipation.
Dr. Pottenger elaborated on malnourishment caused by pasteurized dairy, �??Can human infants be born of mothers who are deficient, and yet attain a fair degree of skeletal development if given a proper raw milk supply? The three infants in figure 4 were born of mothers known to be hypothyroid. Prior to the birth of the infants shown, all three mothers had given birth to children within three years. Each of the previous children was asthmatic, showed infantile rickets, and possessed poor skeletal development. The first child shown in Figure 4 [healthiest-looking] was breast fed from birth, with the mother living under excellent health-promoting conditions. The second child was on powdered milk for four weeks, and on raw certified milk after that without cod-liver oil or orange juice. Both the first and second child began supplemental feedings when they were about five months old and were very healthy babies. The third baby was always sickly and had been on formulae since birth. These formulae included powdered milk, pasteurized milk, boiled milk, boiled certified milk and canned milk. She had suffered from severe gastric distress during her entire infancy and when eight months old she developed asthma. She is very small though her parents are of larger build.[10]
Steinman studied rats.[11] The decay process in rats’ teeth is biologically identical to that in human teeth. He divided his rats into several groups. The control group received a standard nutritious rat chow made by the Purina Company. Steinman discovered that these rats would average less than one cavity for their entire lifetime. The second group received a very heavy refined sugar diet. Although they grew faster than the Purina rats, they averaged 5.6 cavities per rat. The third group was fed �??homogenized Grade A pasteurized milk�?? and they had almost twice as many cavities as the sugar-fed group - 9.4 cavities per animal. Dr. Weston Price in Nutrition and Human Degeneration proved fifty years ago what Steinman showed in 1963: Processed milk leads to disease and premature death.[12] Nizel of Tufts University reported that decayed teeth were four times more common in pasteurized milk-fed babies as opposed to breast-fed babies. Dr. Weston Price, D.D.S., proved that processed food, such as pasteurized milk, causes poor development of the facial bones.
Dr. A. F. Hess wrote in his abstracts, �??�?�pasteurized milk�?�we should realize�?�is an incomplete food�?�infants will develop scurvy on this diet. This form of scurvy takes some months to develop and may be termed subacute. It must be considered not only the most common form of this disorder, but the one which passes most often unrecognized�?��?? [13]
�??Some have questioned whether pasteurized milk is really involved in the production of scurvy. The fact, however, that when one gives a group of infants this food for a period of about six months, instances of scurvy occur, and that a cure is brought about when raw milk is substituted, taken in conjunction with the fact that if we feed the same number of infants on raw milk, cases of scurvy will not develop–these results seem sufficient to warrant the deduction that pasteurized milk is a causative factor. The experience in Berlin, noted by Newmann (Newmann, H., Deutsch. Klin., 7:341, 1904) and others, is most illuminating and convincing in this connection. In 1901 a large dairy in that city established a pasteurizing plant in which all milk was raised to a temperature of about 60 degrees C. After an interval of some months infantile scurvy, was reported from various sources throughout the city. Neumann writes about the situation as follows: [14]
�??Whereas Heubner, Cassel and myself had seen only thirty-two cases of scurvy from 1896 to 1900, the number of cases suddenly rose from the year 1901, so that the same observers–not to mention a great many others–treated eighty-three cases in 1901 and 1902.�?? An investigation was made as to the cause, and the pasteurization was discontinued. The result was that the number of cases decreased just as suddenly as they had increased.�?? [15]
�??One of the most striking clinical phenomenon of infantile scurvy is the marked susceptibility to infection which it entails–the frequent attacks of �??grippe,�?? the widespread occurrence of nasal diphtheria, the furunculosis of the skin, the danger of pneumonia in advanced cases…�?? [16]
�??Recently, Minot and his colleagues came to the conclusion that adult scurvy can be precipitated by infectious processes; in other words, that latent scurvy can by this means be changed to manifest scurvy. In general, therefore, investigations in the laboratory as well as clinical observations are in agreement in stressing the interrelationship of scurvy and bacterial infection.�??
�??This illustrates the futility of pasteurization of milk to prevent infection from diseases the cows may sometimes have, such as undulant fever. The infant is then made subject to the common infectious diseases, and deaths from these common diseases are not attributed, as they should be, to the defective nature of the milk.�??[17]
c. Disease AND DISEASE Risks FROM Drinking Pasteurized Milk
Lipase, an enzyme, in milk helps fat digestion but is totally destroyed by pasteurization. Therefore, no galactose for milk-sugar digestion, no catalase, diastase, or Peroxidase. Pasteurized-milk allergy in children and adults, caused by altering the milk proteins through heating, has caused a major health problem in the United States.
Lactose intolerance for pasteurized dairy is common among many populations, affecting approximately 95% of Asian Americans, 74% of Native Americans, 70% of African Americans, 53% of Mexican Americans, and 15% of Caucasians.[18] Symptoms, which include gastrointestinal distress, diarrhea, and flatulence, occur because these individuals do not have the enzymes that digest the milk sugar lactose in pasteurized milk. Often, with these gastrointestinal symptoms bacteria, such as salmonella, will be found active in the blood and stools, indicating that pasteurized dairy incites bacterial activity that is, then, associated with a food. Food-contamination is often not the problem because the bacterial activity originates in the body to help the body decompose the pasteurized milk or heat-treated food.
Studies have shown cholesterol oxidation products to cause atherosclerosis and cancer. Pasteurized milk contains cholesterol oxides and epoxides. Raw milk has none of these.
Phosphatase is essential for the absorption of calcium and is plentifully present in raw milk but completely destroyed by pasteurization. The �??decalcification�?? of pasteurized and formula milks which are fed to children may be a major cause of osteoporosis later in life. We now know low calcium absorption in even healthy women may cause a loss of spinal bone mass as early as age 20. Such women may lose 50% or more of their bony mass by the age of 70. [19]
R.D. Briggs of the Pathology Department of Washington University School of Medicine, read that the British reported a higher incidence of heart attacks among persons with chronic peptic ulcers.[20],[21] In 1960, Briggs and his associates undertook a statistical study of ten medical centers in the United States and five in Great Britain. They compared the incidence of heart attacks in ulcer patients taking a Sippy (pasteurized, homogenized milkand cream) diet with those not using milk. Results were startling and unequivocal. In the US, patients taking the Sippy diet had a three-fold higher incidence of heart attacks. In England the heavy pasteurized, homogenized milk drinkers had a six-fold increase in heart attacks as compared to the non-milk users. We know from the work of Pottenger, Wulzen, McCulley, and Oster that the specific constituents creating this type of calcification is heated protein and xanthine oxidase. Natural milk, raw milk, contains no heated protein and no biologically available xanthine oxidase.