We buy from a dairy out of Brenham (Kettler). They deliver on Thursdays to the bowling alley. Just wanted to plug them here for any who hadn't heard.

It'll be the best milk you've ever had! I think their FB page has a ph number.

https://www.facebook.com/kettlerdairy

I lived next to a dairy growing up. I will never understand the hype around raw milk.

Brewmaster said:

---

It'll be the best milk you've ever had!

---

And perhaps the last!

I don't think this is everyone, but a typical thing I see from moms/mom groups is there is something behaviorally wrong with their children, so they grasp at anything they can blame for it. Raw milk is rumored to have some benefit at improving child's behavior? Drink it. Mystery red liquid that claims it can cure autism? Put it in their mouth with a eye dropper. Detox heavy metals and "liver flukes"? Use this bull**** pill/pad/ointment.

My dad was poor growing up, they drank raw milk, guess what he doesn't do now? I don't understand the risk when there is zero benefit.

Wow, lots of hate and fear here. Do some more research that isn't MSM and come back. Pasteurized /store milk has been zapped and is void of a lot of key health benefits. Immunoglobulins for 1. I never get sick (and never been sick from the milk).

Raw milk also used to be prescribed for weight loss. I'm almost 50 and working on a 6 pack. I also don't eat processed food though.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just for everyone's edification: no major public health or medical association advocates the drinking of raw milk and strongly recommend against it. In fact, the beneficial claims of ingesting raw milk have been debunked by actual science.

But unless you're in a vulnerable population, it probably won't kill you.

75AG said:

---

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just for everyone's edification: no major public health or medical association advocates the drinking of raw milk and strongly recommend against it. In fact, the beneficial claims of ingesting raw milk have been debunked by actual science.

But unless you're in a vulnerable population, it probably won't kill you.

---

I have never had raw milk, and don't plan on drinking any. However, that said... apparently there are lots of studies showing value of raw milk.

https://thewellnesswatchdog.com/benefits-of-raw-milk/

This site references quite a few studies. I wanted to do a quick google as everything you said contradicts quite a bit of what I'm hearing from other sources.

Grmpy said:

---

75AG said:

---

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just for everyone's edification: no major public health or medical association advocates the drinking of raw milk and strongly recommend against it. In fact, the beneficial claims of ingesting raw milk have been debunked by actual science.

But unless you're in a vulnerable population, it probably won't kill you.

---

I have never had raw milk, and don't plan on drinking any. However, that said... apparently there are lots of studies showing value of raw milk.

https://thewellnesswatchdog.com/benefits-of-raw-milk/

This site references quite a few studies. I wanted to do a quick google as everything you said contradicts quite a bit of what I'm hearing from other sources.

---

I opened the link and clicked on many of their "references" and it took a long time for me to get to a legitimate peer reviewed study. One of the studies they are claiming backs up their claims doesn't include the word "milk". Many of their references are just other websites making similar claims without having legitimate sources to cite.

I am also not for or against raw milk, but that link would not be my go-to for rock solid scientific information.

An example of a proper reference is easy to find, like when I googled "milk-borne diseases" and came across a publication that claims drinking unpasteurized milk accounts for 4% of all foodborne zoonotic diseases, with the majority occuring in developing countries (Kapoor et al, 2023).

There are other references that explain that as long as you don't get sick there are good things that happen for your gut biome, like increased lactobacillus activity (Butler et al, 2020).

If you want to risk it, go for it. But...don't use bad sources to make claims they can't really back up.

Works Cited
Kapoor S, Goel AD and Jain V (2023) Milk-borne diseases through the lens of one health. Front. Microbiol. 14:1041051. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1041051

Butler MI, Bastiaanssen TFS, Long-Smith C, Berding K, Morkl S, Cusack AM, Strain C, Busca K, Porteous-Allen P, Claesson MJ, Stanton C, Cryan JF, Allen D, Dinan TG. Recipe for a Healthy Gut: Intake of Unpasteurised Milk Is Associated with Increased Lactobacillus Abundance in the Human Gut Microbiome. Nutrients. 2020 May 19;12(5):1468. doi: 10.3390/nu12051468. PMID: 32438623; PMCID: PMC7285075.

Edit to add: I've had raw milk straight from the source and it is delicious, but I would never make that a part of my identity.

Brewmaster said:

---

Wow, lots of hate and fear here. Do some more research that isn't MSM and come back. Pasteurized /store milk has been zapped and is void of a lot of key health benefits. Immunoglobulins for 1. I never get sick (and never been sick from the milk).

Raw milk also used to be prescribed for weight loss. I'm almost 50 and working on a 6 pack. I also don't eat processed food though.

---

The amount of "immunoglobulins" in raw milk vs pasteurized milk is the same

From the FDA website: https://www.fda.gov/food/buy-store-serve-safe-food/raw-milk-misconceptions-and-danger-raw-milk-consumption

The concentration of immunoglobulins in bovine milk is low, typically about 0.6-1.0 mg/ml (Hurley, 2003). At these low concentrations, bovine immunoglobulins, when consumed directly from milk, are physiologically insignificant to humans (Fox, 2003).

The predominant fraction of immunoglobulins in bovine milk is IgG (about 85-90%). IgG is quite heat stable. In one study, LTLT pasteurization (63C for 30 min) had no impact on the level of IgG, and HTST pasteurization (72C/15s) resulted in only 1% denaturation of IgG (Mainer et al., 1997).

Kulczychi (1987) hypothesized that the heat-aggregated immunoglobulins may actually have better immunological function because aggregation can amplify the binding affinity of IgG to receptor sites.

References:

• Fox, P. F. 2003. Milk proteins: general and historical aspects, p. 1-48. In P. F. Fox and P. L. H. McSweeney (ed.), Advanced Dairy Chemistry. Volume 1. Proteins. Part A, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.
• Hurley, W. L. 2003. Immunoglobulins in mammary secretions, p. 422-447. In P. F. Fox and P. L. H. McSweeney (ed.), Advanced Dairy Chemistry. Volume 1. Proteins. Part A, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.
• Kulczycki, A. J. 1987. Bovine IgG can aggregate at conditions simulating pasteurization and binds to some human Fc recetpors. Molecular Immunology. 24:259-266.
• Mainer, G., L. Sanchez, J. M. Ena, and M. Calvo. 1997. Kinetic and thermodynamic parameters for heat denaturation of bovine milk IgG, IgA and IgM. Journal of Food Science. 62:1034-1038.

plant science guy said:

---

Grmpy said:

---

75AG said:

---

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just for everyone's edification: no major public health or medical association advocates the drinking of raw milk and strongly recommend against it. In fact, the beneficial claims of ingesting raw milk have been debunked by actual science.

But unless you're in a vulnerable population, it probably won't kill you.

---

I have never had raw milk, and don't plan on drinking any. However, that said... apparently there are lots of studies showing value of raw milk.

https://thewellnesswatchdog.com/benefits-of-raw-milk/

This site references quite a few studies. I wanted to do a quick google as everything you said contradicts quite a bit of what I'm hearing from other sources.

---

I opened the link and clicked on many of their "references" and it took a long time for me to get to a legitimate peer reviewed study. One of the studies they are claiming backs up their claims doesn't include the word "milk". Many of their references are just other websites making similar claims without having legitimate sources to cite.


Edit to add: I've had raw milk straight from the source and it is delicious, but I would never make that a part of my identity.

---

Yep, I think there is confusion here. I don't drink raw milk (I said this) and certainly not passionate enough to go read all the references (no life identity here). I won't be drinking raw milk tomorrow, I find it too difficult to attain for the value it would provide personally; however its pretty clear pasteurization destroys nutritional value just as it sanitizes the milk. This is logical and occurs in all of the food we cook. Common sense if you will.

That said, knowledge can be gained outside of peer reviewed studies. Adults have to operate daily in the world without peer reviews to guide us. I find it fascinating how we latch on to this idea when common sense can quite frequently be more beneficial and studies have error or god forbid intentionally bad data. Looking at the recent outing of alzheimers studies with fabricated data. Another good one could be Covid actions... gosh that was a stupid time.

I listened to an interesting podcast from Bret Weinstein on a paper that couldn't get published in a journal despite its value and how science is now confirming it years later. And it wasn't due to flaws in the paper.

Lets be careful of worshiping academia/journals/associations/government (FDA/CDC) and anything else man made. Its frequently corrupt and frankly lacks common sense. Hell, our associations couldn't calculate the appropriate amount of Vitamin D dosage for adults until just recently and the AAP approves hormone therapy of children as well as surgeries (Gender affirming care added for clarity)... now healthcare entities are being sued by these young adults who were pressured into it. You don't need a medical degree to see flaws in these things. Perhaps you have to lack a medical degree to see with clarity?

Plenty of knowledge outside of medical journals have proved not just true, but damning to the medical establishment. After all, who is going to fund the study that won't make them money?

The medical industry has so many issues besides their error rates; I don't know how people find them trustworthy at this point. Only in very emergent situations should people approach hospitals or even physicians at this point.

I'm not an advocate for Raw Milk... However you will find my a very strong advocate for common sense.

None of the above should be construed as medical advice. I'm not a physician and this is why I have common sense... LOL

I want everyone to think for themselves, don't depend on others to think for you... the expert class failed the soviet union just as it fails the USA.

If your curious on the issues with peer review, there are some good books out there as well as this fun wikepedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scholarly_publishing_stings

Good day to all of you, I found this thread a lot of fun to read through and reply

A few bad apples do not mean peer reviewed research by experts is wrong. Imperfect? Yes.

But it sure beats the random opinions of influencers and whackadoodles on social media. I would argue common sense is extremely compatible with peer reviewed research. And also legitimate criticism of it.

And access to peer reviewed research is easy and available to anyone with internet access (which nowadays is most people).

I would agree that our education system has not done a great job in training people to distinguish high quality research from slop, anecdotes, etc. Hopefully that will change.

I too have enjoyed this thread.

As an aside, I'm not sure I've had better milk in the state than Braum's.

I fully agreed with your comments until your last sentence and the word "then". Our education system failed once again.

Grmpy said:

---

plant science guy said:

---

Grmpy said:

---

75AG said:

---

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just for everyone's edification: no major public health or medical association advocates the drinking of raw milk and strongly recommend against it. In fact, the beneficial claims of ingesting raw milk have been debunked by actual science.

But unless you're in a vulnerable population, it probably won't kill you.

---

I have never had raw milk, and don't plan on drinking any. However, that said... apparently there are lots of studies showing value of raw milk.

https://thewellnesswatchdog.com/benefits-of-raw-milk/

This site references quite a few studies. I wanted to do a quick google as everything you said contradicts quite a bit of what I'm hearing from other sources.

---

I opened the link and clicked on many of their "references" and it took a long time for me to get to a legitimate peer reviewed study. One of the studies they are claiming backs up their claims doesn't include the word "milk". Many of their references are just other websites making similar claims without having legitimate sources to cite.


Edit to add: I've had raw milk straight from the source and it is delicious, but I would never make that a part of my identity.

---

Yep, I think there is confusion here. I don't drink raw milk (I said this) and certainly not passionate enough to go read all the references (no life identity here). I won't be drinking raw milk tomorrow, I find it too difficult to attain for the value it would provide personally; however its pretty clear pasteurization destroys nutritional value just as it sanitizes the milk. This is logical and occurs in all of the food we cook. Common sense if you will.

That said, knowledge can be gained outside of peer reviewed studies. Adults have to operate daily in the world without peer reviews to guide us. I find it fascinating how we latch on to this idea when common sense can quite frequently be more beneficial and studies have error or god forbid intentionally bad data. Looking at the recent outing of alzheimers studies with fabricated data. Another good one could be Covid actions... gosh that was a stupid time.

I listened to an interesting podcast from Bret Weinstein on a paper that couldn't get published in a journal despite its value and how science is now confirming it years later. And it wasn't due to flaws in the paper.

Lets be careful of worshiping academia/journals/associations/government (FDA/CDC) and anything else man made. Its frequently corrupt and frankly lacks common sense. Hell, our associations couldn't calculate the appropriate amount of Vitamin D dosage for adults until just recently and the AAP approves hormone therapy of children as well as surgeries (Gender affirming care added for clarity)... now healthcare entities are being sued by these young adults who were pressured into it. You don't need a medical degree to see flaws in these things. Perhaps you have to lack a medical degree to see with clarity?

Plenty of knowledge outside of medical journals have proved not just true, but damning to the medical establishment. After all, who is going to fund the study that won't make them money?

The medical industry has so many issues besides their error rates; I don't know how people find them trustworthy at this point. Only in very emergent situations should people approach hospitals or even physicians at this point.

I'm not an advocate for Raw Milk... However you will find my a very strong advocate for common sense.

None of the above should be construed as medical advice. I'm not a physician and this is why I have common sense... LOL

I want everyone to think for themselves, don't depend on others to think for you... the expert class failed the soviet union just as it fails the USA.

If your curious on the issues with peer review, there are some good books out there as well as this fun wikepedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scholarly_publishing_stings

Good day to all of you, I found this thread a lot of fun to read through and reply

---

I have no problem living in the world outside of academia, I left academia and I don't worship it. I think if you dig in a little more, you'll find a lot of the things you interact with in your daily life have been guided by academia to a greater degree than you suspect, to your benefit. Either way that wasn't the topic being discussed.

Yes, everything manmade can be flawed.

My post was inspired by your comment that "the site references quite a few studies". It doesn't. Derived from academia or not, there is a certain level of care that you have to take when you're putting something out there that will affect people's health. Common sense. So a bunch of red flags go up for me when a website claims to cite "studies" and doesn't.

The diversion to indict the medical industry as a whole doesn't really address the topic. However, if we want to talk about monetary benefit, it would benefit a business selling raw milk to downplay the risks associated with drinking raw milk. There was a reason pasteurization was invented in the 1800's, long before the soviet union and american medical complex.

edit to add: There's a lot more to the expert class in the soviet union failing them than simple reliance on academics. Most of their work was politically controlled. You couldn't publish results that went against the regime's talking points, which should sound familiar to both sides of the aisle for the last 20 years. But, that's off topic.

Quote:

---

however its pretty clear pasteurization destroys nutritional value just as it sanitizes the milk. This is logical and occurs in all of the food we cook. Common sense if you will.

---

There are plenty of foods that get more nutritious when you cook them.

https://www.hri.org.au/health/your-health/nutrition/nine-vegetables-that-are-healthier-for-you-when-cooked

But I'm sure anyone with common sense already knew that.

I don't think drinking raw milk is a new idea. I think it was the norm before a guy named Louis Pasteur came long.

Geez Louise, I wasn't trying to start WW3! My 74 yo hubs loves the stuff and finding it is a little hard to do. I do not give 2 craps about studies or what "experts" say. At our age who cares? He loves it, he wants it, nuff said.

I will never understand why everything has to turn into an argument. Some of yall need to check yourself.

Can't we just go back to sittin' on the porch, drinkin' sweet tea and being good neighbors?

FlyRod said:

---

A few bad apples do not mean peer reviewed research by experts is wrong. Imperfect? Yes.

But it sure beats the random opinions of influencers and whackadoodles on social media. I would argue common sense is extremely compatible with peer reviewed research. And also legitimate criticism of it.

And access to peer reviewed research is easy and available to anyone with internet access (which nowadays is most people).

I would agree that our education system has not done a great job in training people to distinguish high quality research from slop, anecdotes, etc. Hopefully that will change.

I too have enjoyed this thread.

As an aside, I'm not sure I've had better milk in the state than Braum's.

---

I don't trust the experts anymore. They're basically political place holders and not true scientists; just regurgitating the science done 50 years ago to look legit. The pandemic drew the curtain wide open. They cannot be trusted, in fact they are dangerous. The ones who fought back during the pandemic have been right! Give me raw milk! I have eaten raw eggs bodybuilding for over 20 years and I've never been sick once.