I watched the raw milk Harvard debate yesterday. It was shocking how unpleasantly rude, yet how unsubstantial Mr. Fred Pritzker's presentation was. The raw milk proponents did a good job and actually had data and studies that could be cross-referenced as far as the health benefits of raw milk vs. pasteurized milk, but the response was the typical "Raw milk will kill you and everything you love because the government says so," line.
Yesterday, while I was milking Matilda, I was thinking about the debate. I haven't been sick from food poisoning in 8 years. I've been drinking raw milk for nearly 8 years now. The last time I got food poisoning was months before I ever had a glass of raw milk in my life. I had gone to a restaurant and eaten a sandwich and some potato salad, and my goodness I was sick! But I have never, ever been sick from raw milk. Kind of interesting, considering how "dangerous" raw milk is supposed to be. My whole family has been drinking raw milk for years--my mother, my brother, my father, my husband and my children--and none of us has ever been sick from it.
The opposition's main debate tactic was trying to cultivate fear. It's too bad that infectious diseases are so easy to scare people with. I personally find it really chilling to learn how many permanent injuries and deaths are caused by vaccines or by properly prescribed medicine, although no one ever mentions that much--for obvious reasons. One great moment is at the end of the debate when the opposition is asked to comment on the data presented by the raw milk people, and they just kind of stutter and don't know what to say. One of the comments posted made a really good point:
When will the public health agents stop saying that drinking raw milk is like playing "Russian Roulette?" The odds of dying from Russian Roulette is 1 in 6. That means 1.5 million Americans would by dying each year from raw milk (based on 1/6 of 9 million raw milk drinkers nationwide). How do these people even get through grade school?"